Building open-source software for the glory of the Lord Jesus Christ ☦️
With love for developers of all backgrounds around the world ❤️
With love for developers of all backgrounds around the world ❤️
Every number on this page comes from the open benchmark repo: github.com/1gr14/point0-benchmarks. The setup: the same app — a small blog plus a SaaS-style dashboard — built four times (Point0, Next.js, TanStack Start, React Router), each in its framework's native idiom, rendering the same content from the same deterministic in-memory store. A Playwright parity gate (22 assertions per app) must be green before any number counts; results are medians over repeated runs; raw per-run JSON is committed. This page is the short read — the repo README carries the full method and all tables.
Measured on an Apple M1 Pro (August 2026): Point0 0.3.10, Next.js 16.3.0,
TanStack Start 1.168.27, React Router 8.3.0, React 19.2.7 everywhere. Each
framework runs on its own supported runtime — Point0 on Bun 1.3.14, the others
on Node 22.21.1 — and every load number sits next to a bare Bun.serve /
node:http floor, so runtime and framework tax stay separable.
In the tables, every competitor cell carries a small delta vs Point0: green means that framework is better on the metric, red means worse. Point0's own cells stay bare.
| Point0 | Next.js | TanStack Start | React Router | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Runtime (as shipped) | Bun | Node | Node | Node |
| Prod build, L (+500 pages) ↓ | 10.26 s | 11.85 s +15% | 18.82 s +83% | 4.53 s −56% |
| HMR, edit → DOM ↓ | 14 ms | 42 ms 3.0× | 161 ms 11.5× | 152 ms 10.9× |
| Dev start, warm ↓ | 1,281 ms | 1,991 ms +55% | 2,027 ms +58% | 1,296 ms +1% |
| Editor re-check, L ↓ | 1.47 s | 1.26 s −14% | 1.50 s +2% | 1.42 s −3% |
| Cold type-check (CI), L · TS7 ↓ | 6.74 s | 0.24 s −96% | 0.60 s −91% | 1.13 s −83% |
| First-load JS, /post (gzip) ↓ | 152 kB | 135 kB −11% | 104 kB −32% | 103 kB −32% |
| Nav payload, dashboard → dashboard ↓ | 473 B | 1,342 B +184% | 275 B −42% | 552 B +17% |
| Time-to-shell, /slow (streamed) ↓ | 7 ms | 8 ms +14% | 3 ms −57% | 4 ms −43% |
| SSR /post, req/s c64 ↑ * | 1,166 | 834 −28% | 3,388 +191% | 1,239 +6% |
| Prod cold start ↓ | 463 ms | 759 ms +64% | 99 ms −79% | 629 ms +36% |
↓ lower is better · ↑ higher is better. * Point0's SSR row is its warmed
build (.onPrefetchPage, 0 re-renders) — the peer of the others' eager loaders;
the default lazy build does 888 req/s.
Cold whole-project tsc and editor responsiveness are different metrics, and
conflating them is the usual mistake.
The cold check is Point0's slow axis. Inferring everything end-to-end with zero annotations costs ~4,300 type instantiations per page: at 500 pages that's 2.23M instantiations — 6.7 s on native TS7, 17.4 s on the JS tsc — versus Next's 0.24 s and TanStack's 0.6 s. You pay that in CI.
The per-edit re-check — the lag you feel while typing — stays flat. Point0
pages are isolated exports: no monolithic AppRouter type to re-instantiate on
each keystroke (the tRPC trap), and the generated route map is just path
strings.
| Per-edit re-check | Point0 | Next.js | TanStack Start | React Router |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 4 pages | 1.38 s | 1.03 s −25% | 1.34 s −3% | 1.05 s −24% |
| 504 pages | 1.47 s | 1.26 s −14% | 1.50 s +2% | 1.42 s −3% |
Everyone holds flat here now (Next fixed its old per-edit degradation in 16.x); Point0 sits at the top of the band — ~0.2 s behind Next, in the same lane as TanStack — not multiples behind anyone. The outlier at scale is React Router's cold check: its typed routes explode combinatorially — 10k instantiations at 4 pages, 4.35M at 504, double Point0's count.
After the first document, a Point0 navigation ships only query data. On a post→post click that's ~0.84 kB against Next's ~1.2 kB RSC payload (TanStack: ~0.63 kB, React Router: ~0.94 kB). The dashboard case — rich markup, tiny data, the shape of a real SaaS page — makes the split sharp: Point0 moves 473 B per click and TanStack 275 B, while Next re-sends the rendered markup as its flight payload — 1,342 B, roughly 3× Point0.
The other side of the ledger: first-load JS. Point0 is currently the heaviest of the four — 152 kB gzipped against Next's 135 kB and TanStack's and React Router's ~103 kB — the bundle price of the RSC/streaming machinery added through 0.2–0.3. Point0 pays once on the first load and collects on every click after.
Every framework here can stream a slow block into the same response after the
shell. On a page with one 1.5 s query, all four ship the shell in single-digit
milliseconds when streaming — Point0 in 7 ms via a .loading() fallback +
.query({ suspend: 'server' }). The contrast row is Point0 with streaming off:
the whole document waits for the slow block, and the shell arrives at ~1,510 ms.
That's what streaming buys back — and Point0 makes it a per-query opt-in instead
of an architecture decision.
On raw SSR throughput with in-memory data, TanStack leads (3,388 req/s), React
Router and warmed Point0 are essentially tied (1,239 vs 1,166), Next is behind
(834). Point0's default is a render-to-discover loop: it renders, sees which
queries the page needs, fetches, re-renders — so you never declare a page's data
dependencies, which none of the other three offer. That convenience costs ~24%
(888 req/s); one opt-in hook (.onPrefetchPage(() => q.fetchQuery(...)))
removes it.
Point0's SSR document carries data twice — markup plus the dehydrated React Query cache that makes every piece of data a live, cacheable query on the client. On a text-heavy post that's 6.5 kB raw vs TanStack's 3.8 kB — and gzip cuts the gap sharply: 2.2 kB vs 1.7 kB. Next's document is the largest of the four (8.9 kB raw, 2.4 kB gzipped): RSC inlines its flight payload, duplicating the same data in a less compressible format.
Prod cold start is 463 ms — behind TanStack's 99 ms, ahead of React Router's 629 ms and Next's 759 ms. Part of that is deliberate: Point0 imports the whole app at boot, so a broken page fails the process at deploy time, not on a user's first request.
The raw-SSR numbers above measure frameworks in a vacuum — the loader is trivial, so framework CPU is the whole latency. Add one realistic DB query and the gap collapses:
| DB delay | Point0 | Next.js | TanStack Start | React Router |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0 ms | 1.15 ms | 1.76 ms +53% | 0.33 ms −71% | 1.01 ms −12% |
| 20 ms | 27.14 ms | 25.48 ms −6% | 24.96 ms −8% | 26.07 ms −4% |
At 20 ms of DB latency all four land within 25–27 ms; the framework becomes a 20–26% slice that keeps shrinking as queries get heavier. That's why Point0 spends its budget on what a database can't erase: HMR, navigation payloads, and the edit loop.
git clone https://github.com/1gr14/point0-benchmarks
cd point0-benchmarks
bun run setup # installs all four apps + Playwright
bun run parity # the gate — 22/22 must pass per app
bun run bench:all
bun run render # regenerates the README from results/Numbers are machine-dependent (except type instantiations and byte sizes, which are deterministic); the repo's manifest records the exact machine and versions behind every published table. If you find a setup that treats any framework unfairly — open an issue.