neqo feat: Reduce reallocations in RxStreamOrderer

Let's see if this helps performance.

Sep 22 '25 07:09 larseggert

Codecov Report

:white_check_mark: All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests. :white_check_mark: Project coverage is 93.36%. Comparing base (b3d8f0d) to head (cc5c529).

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #3003      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   95.66%   93.36%   -2.31%     
==========================================
  Files         123      123              
  Lines       35702    35712      +10     
  Branches    35702    35712      +10     
==========================================
- Hits        34156    33342     -814     
- Misses       1506     1528      +22     
- Partials       40      842     +802

Components	Coverage Δ
neqo-common	`97.31% <ø> (-0.88%)`	:arrow_down:
neqo-crypto	`83.31% <ø> (-7.17%)`	:arrow_down:
neqo-http3	`93.32% <ø> (-1.81%)`	:arrow_down:
neqo-qpack	`94.14% <ø> (-2.09%)`	:arrow_down:
neqo-transport	`94.44% <100.00%> (-2.14%)`	:arrow_down:
neqo-udp	`80.48% <ø> (-10.74%)`	:arrow_down:
mtu	`85.76% <ø> (-1.74%)`	:arrow_down:

Sep 22 '25 07:09 codecov[bot]

Bencher Report

Branch	feat-inbound_frame-prealloc
Testbed	On-prem

Click to view all benchmark results

Benchmark	Latency	Benchmark Result milliseconds (ms) (Result Δ%)	Upper Boundary milliseconds (ms) (Limit %)
google vs. neqo (cubic, paced)	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	278.12 ms (-0.08%) Baseline: 278.34 ms	282.73 ms (98.37%)

Benchmark	Latency	Benchmark Result milliseconds (ms) (Result Δ%)	Upper Boundary milliseconds (ms) (Limit %)
msquic vs. neqo (cubic, paced)	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	224.72 ms (+12.76%) Baseline: 199.30 ms	236.94 ms (94.84%)

Benchmark	Latency	Benchmark Result milliseconds (ms) (Result Δ%)	Upper Boundary milliseconds (ms) (Limit %)
neqo vs. google (cubic, paced)	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	756.26 ms (-0.45%) Baseline: 759.69 ms	774.82 ms (97.61%)

Benchmark	Latency	Benchmark Result milliseconds (ms) (Result Δ%)	Upper Boundary milliseconds (ms) (Limit %)
neqo vs. msquic (cubic, paced)	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	156.46 ms (-0.83%) Baseline: 157.78 ms	160.59 ms (97.43%)

Benchmark	Latency	Benchmark Result milliseconds (ms) (Result Δ%)	Upper Boundary milliseconds (ms) (Limit %)
neqo vs. neqo (cubic)	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	94.69 ms (+3.42%) Baseline: 91.56 ms	96.88 ms (97.74%)

Benchmark	Latency	Benchmark Result milliseconds (ms) (Result Δ%)	Upper Boundary milliseconds (ms) (Limit %)
neqo vs. neqo (cubic, paced)	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	94.16 ms (+1.35%) Baseline: 92.90 ms	98.09 ms (95.99%)

Benchmark	Latency	Benchmark Result milliseconds (ms) (Result Δ%)	Upper Boundary milliseconds (ms) (Limit %)
neqo vs. neqo (reno)	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	93.24 ms (+1.86%) Baseline: 91.54 ms	96.70 ms (96.43%)

Benchmark	Latency	Benchmark Result milliseconds (ms) (Result Δ%)	Upper Boundary milliseconds (ms) (Limit %)
neqo vs. neqo (reno, paced)	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	95.04 ms (+2.42%) Baseline: 92.79 ms	97.78 ms (97.19%)

Benchmark	Latency	Benchmark Result milliseconds (ms) (Result Δ%)	Upper Boundary milliseconds (ms) (Limit %)
neqo vs. quiche (cubic, paced)	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	191.75 ms (-0.97%) Baseline: 193.64 ms	196.97 ms (97.35%)

Benchmark	Latency	Benchmark Result milliseconds (ms) (Result Δ%)	Upper Boundary milliseconds (ms) (Limit %)
neqo vs. s2n (cubic, paced)	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	221.72 ms (+0.26%) Baseline: 221.14 ms	224.10 ms (98.94%)

Benchmark	Latency	Benchmark Result milliseconds (ms) (Result Δ%)	Upper Boundary milliseconds (ms) (Limit %)
quiche vs. neqo (cubic, paced)	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	157.33 ms (+2.74%) Baseline: 153.14 ms	158.50 ms (99.26%)

Benchmark	Latency	Benchmark Result milliseconds (ms) (Result Δ%)	Upper Boundary milliseconds (ms) (Limit %)
s2n vs. neqo (cubic, paced)	📈 view plot 🚷 view threshold	173.28 ms (-0.28%) Baseline: 173.77 ms	178.00 ms (97.35%)

🐰 View full continuous benchmarking report in Bencher

Sep 22 '25 08:09 github-actions[bot]

Benchmark results

Performance differences relative to b3d8f0d21db5657ebafb14f9b60c8892d2eb3aa9.

1-conn/1-100mb-resp/mtu-1504 (aka. Download)/client: No change in performance detected.

       time:   [200.11 ms 200.47 ms 200.96 ms]
       thrpt:  [497.61 MiB/s 498.82 MiB/s 499.72 MiB/s]
change:
       time:   [−0.0850% +0.1485% +0.4403%] (p = 0.28 > 0.05)
       thrpt:  [−0.4384% −0.1483% +0.0851%]
Found 1 outliers among 100 measurements (1.00%)
1 (1.00%) high severe

1-conn/10_000-parallel-1b-resp/mtu-1504 (aka. RPS)/client: No change in performance detected.

       time:   [299.66 ms 301.36 ms 303.08 ms]
       thrpt:  [32.994 Kelem/s 33.183 Kelem/s 33.371 Kelem/s]
change:
       time:   [−0.3116% +0.4839% +1.2104%] (p = 0.21 > 0.05)
       thrpt:  [−1.1959% −0.4816% +0.3126%]
Found 2 outliers among 100 measurements (2.00%)
1 (1.00%) low mild
1 (1.00%) high mild

1-conn/1-1b-resp/mtu-1504 (aka. HPS)/client: No change in performance detected.

       time:   [28.416 ms 28.512 ms 28.630 ms]
       thrpt:  [34.928   B/s 35.073   B/s 35.191   B/s]
change:
       time:   [−0.3750% +0.0906% +0.5737%] (p = 0.71 > 0.05)
       thrpt:  [−0.5704% −0.0905% +0.3764%]
Found 23 outliers among 100 measurements (23.00%)
11 (11.00%) low severe
1 (1.00%) high mild
11 (11.00%) high severe

1-conn/1-100mb-req/mtu-1504 (aka. Upload)/client: :green_heart: Performance has improved.

       time:   [202.29 ms 202.62 ms 203.01 ms]
       thrpt:  [492.58 MiB/s 493.52 MiB/s 494.33 MiB/s]
change:
       time:   [−3.7342% −3.4882% −3.2606%] (p = 0.00 +3.6142% +3.8791%]
Found 2 outliers among 100 measurements (2.00%)
2 (2.00%) high severe

decode 4096 bytes, mask ff: No change in performance detected.

       time:   [11.613 µs 11.651 µs 11.694 µs]
       change: [−0.8027% −0.1804% +0.3326%] (p = 0.57 > 0.05)
Found 18 outliers among 100 measurements (18.00%)
2 (2.00%) low severe
6 (6.00%) low mild
3 (3.00%) high mild
7 (7.00%) high severe

decode 1048576 bytes, mask ff: No change in performance detected.

       time:   [3.0185 ms 3.0278 ms 3.0387 ms]
       change: [−0.8118% −0.1895% +0.3544%] (p = 0.54 > 0.05)
Found 8 outliers among 100 measurements (8.00%)
8 (8.00%) high severe

decode 4096 bytes, mask 7f: No change in performance detected.

       time:   [19.948 µs 19.998 µs 20.056 µs]
       change: [−0.3160% +0.1413% +0.5881%] (p = 0.57 > 0.05)
Found 17 outliers among 100 measurements (17.00%)
1 (1.00%) low severe
1 (1.00%) high mild
15 (15.00%) high severe

decode 1048576 bytes, mask 7f: No change in performance detected.

       time:   [5.0328 ms 5.0426 ms 5.0540 ms]
       change: [−1.2024% −0.5035% +0.0438%] (p = 0.12 > 0.05)
Found 11 outliers among 100 measurements (11.00%)
1 (1.00%) low mild
10 (10.00%) high severe

decode 4096 bytes, mask 3f: No change in performance detected.

       time:   [8.2789 µs 8.3159 µs 8.3580 µs]
       change: [+0.0483% +0.5635% +1.1728%] (p = 0.06 > 0.05)
Found 25 outliers among 100 measurements (25.00%)
2 (2.00%) low severe
8 (8.00%) low mild
3 (3.00%) high mild
12 (12.00%) high severe

decode 1048576 bytes, mask 3f: No change in performance detected.

       time:   [1.5881 ms 1.5949 ms 1.6035 ms]
       change: [−2.0388% −0.4004% +0.7757%] (p = 0.67 > 0.05)
Found 11 outliers among 100 measurements (11.00%)
3 (3.00%) high mild
8 (8.00%) high severe

1-streams/each-1000-bytes/wallclock-time: Change within noise threshold.

       time:   [589.89 µs 591.70 µs 593.79 µs]
       change: [−1.1506% −0.6516% −0.1492%] (p = 0.01 Found 5 outliers among 100 measurements (5.00%)
5 (5.00%) high severe
1-streams/each-1000-bytes/simulated-time
time:   [118.79 ms 118.98 ms 119.17 ms]
thrpt:  [8.1944 KiB/s 8.2076 KiB/s 8.2211 KiB/s]
change:
time:   [−0.2819% −0.0113% +0.2549%] (p = 0.93 > 0.05)
thrpt:  [−0.2543% +0.0113% +0.2827%]
No change in performance detected.
Found 1 outliers among 100 measurements (1.00%)
1 (1.00%) low mild

1000-streams/each-1-bytes/wallclock-time: Change within noise threshold.

       time:   [14.032 ms 14.061 ms 14.092 ms]
       change: [−0.9199% −0.6459% −0.3527%] (p = 0.00 Found 1 outliers among 100 measurements (1.00%)
1 (1.00%) high mild
1000-streams/each-1-bytes/simulated-time
time:   [14.985 s 15.000 s 15.014 s]
thrpt:  [66.605   B/s 66.668   B/s 66.732   B/s]
change:
time:   [−0.1109% +0.0187% +0.1448%] (p = 0.78 > 0.05)
thrpt:  [−0.1446% −0.0187% +0.1110%]
No change in performance detected.
Found 2 outliers among 100 measurements (2.00%)
1 (1.00%) low mild
1 (1.00%) high mild

1000-streams/each-1000-bytes/wallclock-time: No change in performance detected.

       time:   [50.776 ms 50.939 ms 51.101 ms]
       change: [−0.1426% +0.5306% +1.1027%] (p = 0.10 > 0.05)

1000-streams/each-1000-bytes/simulated-time: No change in performance detected.

       time:   [18.741 s 18.912 s 19.085 s]
       thrpt:  [51.170 KiB/s 51.638 KiB/s 52.110 KiB/s]
change:
       time:   [−0.9411% +0.3276% +1.5536%] (p = 0.62 > 0.05)
       thrpt:  [−1.5298% −0.3265% +0.9501%]
Found 1 outliers among 100 measurements (1.00%)
1 (1.00%) high mild

coalesce_acked_from_zero 1+1 entries: No change in performance detected.

       time:   [88.191 ns 88.538 ns 88.895 ns]
       change: [−0.1959% +0.3684% +1.1270%] (p = 0.28 > 0.05)
Found 10 outliers among 100 measurements (10.00%)
6 (6.00%) high mild
4 (4.00%) high severe

coalesce_acked_from_zero 3+1 entries: No change in performance detected.

       time:   [106.03 ns 106.55 ns 107.30 ns]
       change: [−0.2849% +0.3210% +1.0704%] (p = 0.39 > 0.05)
Found 9 outliers among 100 measurements (9.00%)
9 (9.00%) high severe

coalesce_acked_from_zero 10+1 entries: No change in performance detected.

       time:   [105.58 ns 106.07 ns 106.64 ns]
       change: [−0.4911% −0.0224% +0.4220%] (p = 0.92 > 0.05)
Found 15 outliers among 100 measurements (15.00%)
4 (4.00%) low severe
3 (3.00%) low mild
1 (1.00%) high mild
7 (7.00%) high severe

coalesce_acked_from_zero 1000+1 entries: No change in performance detected.

       time:   [88.723 ns 91.556 ns 98.100 ns]
       change: [−1.4101% +2.7728% +10.065%] (p = 0.60 > 0.05)
Found 14 outliers among 100 measurements (14.00%)
6 (6.00%) high mild
8 (8.00%) high severe

RxStreamOrderer::inbound_frame(): :green_heart: Performance has improved.

       time:   [102.63 ms 102.79 ms 103.07 ms]
       change: [−7.6514% −7.3735% −7.0581%] (p = 0.00 Found 10 outliers among 100 measurements (10.00%)
6 (6.00%) low mild
2 (2.00%) high mild
2 (2.00%) high severe

sent::Packets::take_ranges: No change in performance detected.

       time:   [4.5298 µs 4.6645 µs 4.8068 µs]
       change: [−2.0069% +1.3391% +5.2122%] (p = 0.52 > 0.05)
Found 4 outliers among 100 measurements (4.00%)
3 (3.00%) high mild
1 (1.00%) high severe

transfer/pacing-false/varying-seeds/wallclock-time/run: Change within noise threshold.

       time:   [26.951 ms 27.000 ms 27.052 ms]
       change: [+0.9397% +1.2158% +1.4901%] (p = 0.00 Found 4 outliers among 100 measurements (4.00%)
1 (1.00%) low mild
2 (2.00%) high mild
1 (1.00%) high severe

transfer/pacing-false/varying-seeds/simulated-time/run: No change in performance detected.

       time:   [25.129 s 25.166 s 25.204 s]
       thrpt:  [162.52 KiB/s 162.76 KiB/s 163.00 KiB/s]
change:
       time:   [−0.2319% −0.0321% +0.1692%] (p = 0.76 > 0.05)
       thrpt:  [−0.1689% +0.0321% +0.2325%]
Found 3 outliers among 100 measurements (3.00%)
1 (1.00%) low mild
2 (2.00%) high mild

transfer/pacing-true/varying-seeds/wallclock-time/run: Change within noise threshold.

       time:   [27.309 ms 27.379 ms 27.452 ms]
       change: [+0.4884% +0.8607% +1.2416%] (p = 0.00 Found 4 outliers among 100 measurements (4.00%)
4 (4.00%) high mild

transfer/pacing-true/varying-seeds/simulated-time/run: Change within noise threshold.

       time:   [24.987 s 25.033 s 25.079 s]
       thrpt:  [163.32 KiB/s 163.62 KiB/s 163.92 KiB/s]
change:
       time:   [+0.0800% +0.3075% +0.5500%] (p = 0.01 −0.3065% −0.0799%]

transfer/pacing-false/same-seed/wallclock-time/run: Change within noise threshold.

       time:   [26.419 ms 26.434 ms 26.449 ms]
       change: [+0.9941% +1.1013% +1.2043%] (p = 0.00 Found 3 outliers among 100 measurements (3.00%)
3 (3.00%) high mild

transfer/pacing-false/same-seed/simulated-time/run: No change in performance detected.

       time:   [25.152 s 25.152 s 25.152 s]
       thrpt:  [162.85 KiB/s 162.85 KiB/s 162.85 KiB/s]
change:
       time:   [+0.0000% +0.0000% +0.0000%] (p = NaN > 0.05)
       thrpt:  [+0.0000% +0.0000% +0.0000%]

transfer/pacing-true/same-seed/wallclock-time/run: Change within noise threshold.

       time:   [28.142 ms 28.160 ms 28.179 ms]
       change: [+0.0679% +0.1823% +0.2954%] (p = 0.00 Found 4 outliers among 100 measurements (4.00%)
4 (4.00%) high mild

transfer/pacing-true/same-seed/simulated-time/run: No change in performance detected.

       time:   [25.588 s 25.588 s 25.588 s]
       thrpt:  [160.07 KiB/s 160.07 KiB/s 160.07 KiB/s]
change:
       time:   [+0.0000% +0.0000% +0.0000%] (p = NaN > 0.05)
       thrpt:  [+0.0000% +0.0000% +0.0000%]

Download data for profiler.firefox.com or download performance comparison data.

Sep 22 '25 08:09 github-actions[bot]

Hm. Transfer test regression, but one bench shows an improvement. Time to look at flamegraphs...

Sep 22 '25 08:09 larseggert

Hm. Simplifying inbound_frame drastically doesn't seem to make things slower.

Sep 23 '25 14:09 larseggert

So what we save in memcpy we spend on malloc now :-)

Sep 23 '25 14:09 larseggert

CodSpeed Performance Report

Merging #3003 will improve performances by 17.7%

_{Comparing larseggert:feat-inbound_frame-prealloc (102a412) with main (b9c32c7)}

Summary

⚡ 1 improvement
✅ 22 untouched

Benchmarks breakdown

	Mode	Benchmark	`BASE`	`HEAD`	Change
⚡	Simulation	`client`	852.3 ms	724.1 ms	+17.7%

Nov 12 '25 07:11 codspeed-hq[bot]

Failed Interop Tests

QUIC Interop Runner, client vs. server, differences relative to b9c32c70e273cd89f25d7f0561e01a083b8bdf03.

neqo-latest as client

neqo-latest vs. aioquic: A :warning:C1
neqo-latest vs. go-x-net: A BP BA
neqo-latest vs. haproxy: :rocket:~~M~~ A :warning:L1 C1 BP BA
neqo-latest vs. kwik: BP BA
neqo-latest vs. linuxquic: A C1
neqo-latest vs. lsquic: L1 C1
neqo-latest vs. msquic: R :rocket:~~Z~~ A L1 C1
neqo-latest vs. mvfst: A L1 :warning:C1
neqo-latest vs. neqo: :warning:L1
neqo-latest vs. nginx: A :rocket:~~L1~~ C1 BP BA
neqo-latest vs. ngtcp2: A :rocket:~~C1~~ CM
neqo-latest vs. picoquic: :rocket:~~R~~ A L1 C1
neqo-latest vs. quic-go: A :rocket:~~C1~~
neqo-latest vs. quiche: A :rocket:~~L1~~ BP BA
neqo-latest vs. quinn: A :rocket:~~L1~~ :warning:C1
neqo-latest vs. s2n-quic: A :warning:C1 BP BA CM
neqo-latest vs. tquic: S A :warning:L1 C1 BP BA
neqo-latest vs. xquic: run cancelled after 20 min

neqo-latest as server

aioquic vs. neqo-latest: CM
go-x-net vs. neqo-latest: CM
kwik vs. neqo-latest: BP BA CM
msquic vs. neqo-latest: :rocket:~~U BP~~ CM
mvfst vs. neqo-latest: Z A L1 C1 CM
openssl vs. neqo-latest: LR M A CM
quic-go vs. neqo-latest: CM
quiche vs. neqo-latest: run cancelled after 20 min
quinn vs. neqo-latest: V2 CM
s2n-quic vs. neqo-latest: CM
tquic vs. neqo-latest: CM
xquic vs. neqo-latest: M CM

All results

Succeeded Interop Tests

QUIC Interop Runner, client vs. server

neqo-latest as client

neqo-latest vs. aioquic: H DC LR C20 M S R Z 3 B U L1 L2 :warning:C1 C2 6 V2 BP BA
neqo-latest vs. go-x-net: H DC LR M B U L2 C2 6
neqo-latest vs. haproxy: H DC LR C20 :rocket:~~M~~ S R Z 3 B U :warning:L1 L2 C2 6 V2
neqo-latest vs. kwik: H DC LR C20 M S R Z 3 B U A L1 L2 C1 C2 6 V2
neqo-latest vs. linuxquic: H DC LR C20 M S R Z 3 B U E L1 L2 C2 6 V2 BP BA CM
neqo-latest vs. lsquic: H DC LR C20 M S R Z 3 B U E A L2 C2 6 V2 BP BA CM
neqo-latest vs. msquic: H DC LR C20 M S :rocket:~~Z~~ B U L2 C2 6 V2 BP BA
neqo-latest vs. mvfst: H DC LR M R Z 3 B U L2 :warning:C1 C2 6 BP BA
neqo-latest vs. neqo: H DC LR C20 M S R Z 3 B U E A :warning:L1 L2 C1 C2 6 V2 BP BA CM
neqo-latest vs. neqo-latest: H DC LR C20 M S R Z 3 B U E A L1 L2 C1 C2 6 V2 BP BA CM
neqo-latest vs. nginx: H DC LR C20 M S R Z 3 B U :rocket:~~L1~~ L2 C2 6
neqo-latest vs. ngtcp2: H DC LR C20 M S R Z 3 B U E L1 L2 :rocket:~~C1~~ C2 6 V2 BP BA
neqo-latest vs. picoquic: H DC LR C20 M S :rocket:~~R~~ Z 3 B U E L2 C2 6 V2 BP BA
neqo-latest vs. quic-go: H DC LR C20 M S R Z 3 B U L1 L2 :rocket:~~C1~~ C2 6 BP BA
neqo-latest vs. quiche: H DC LR C20 M S R Z 3 B U :rocket:~~L1~~ L2 C1 C2 6
neqo-latest vs. quinn: H DC LR C20 M S R Z 3 B U E :rocket:~~L1~~ L2 :warning:C1 C2 6 BP BA
neqo-latest vs. s2n-quic: H DC LR C20 M S R 3 B U E L1 L2 :warning:C1 C2 6
neqo-latest vs. tquic: H DC LR C20 M R Z 3 B U :warning:L1 L2 :warning:C1 C2 6

neqo-latest as server

aioquic vs. neqo-latest: H DC LR C20 M S R Z 3 B U A L1 L2 C1 C2 6 V2 BP BA
chrome vs. neqo-latest: 3
go-x-net vs. neqo-latest: H DC LR M B U A L2 C2 6 BP BA
kwik vs. neqo-latest: H DC LR C20 M S R Z 3 B U A L1 L2 C1 C2 6 V2
linuxquic vs. neqo-latest: H DC LR C20 M S R Z 3 B U E A L1 L2 C1 C2 6 V2 BP BA CM
lsquic vs. neqo-latest: H DC LR C20 M S R 3 B E A L1 L2 C1 C2 6 V2 BP BA CM
msquic vs. neqo-latest: H DC LR C20 M S R Z B :rocket:~~U~~ A L1 L2 C1 C2 6 V2 :rocket:~~BP~~ BA
mvfst vs. neqo-latest: H DC LR M 3 B L2 C2 6 BP BA
neqo vs. neqo-latest: H DC LR C20 M S R Z 3 B U E A L1 L2 C1 C2 6 V2 BP BA CM
ngtcp2 vs. neqo-latest: H DC LR C20 M S R Z 3 B U E A L1 L2 C1 C2 6 V2 BP BA CM
openssl vs. neqo-latest: H DC C20 S R 3 B L2 C2 6 BP BA
picoquic vs. neqo-latest: H DC LR C20 M S R Z 3 B U E A L1 L2 C1 C2 6 V2 BP BA CM
quic-go vs. neqo-latest: H DC LR C20 M S R Z 3 B U A L1 L2 C1 C2 6 BP BA
quinn vs. neqo-latest: H DC LR C20 M S R Z 3 B U E A L1 L2 C1 C2 6 BP BA
s2n-quic vs. neqo-latest: H DC LR M S R 3 B E A L1 L2 C1 C2 6 BP BA
tquic vs. neqo-latest: H DC LR M S R Z 3 B A L1 L2 C1 C2 6 BP BA
xquic vs. neqo-latest: H DC LR C20 S R Z 3 B U A L1 L2 C1 C2 6 BP BA

Unsupported Interop Tests

QUIC Interop Runner, client vs. server

neqo-latest as client

neqo-latest vs. aioquic: E CM
neqo-latest vs. go-x-net: C20 S R Z 3 E L1 C1 V2 CM
neqo-latest vs. haproxy: E CM
neqo-latest vs. kwik: E CM
neqo-latest vs. msquic: 3 E CM
neqo-latest vs. mvfst: C20 S E V2 CM
neqo-latest vs. nginx: E V2 CM
neqo-latest vs. picoquic: CM
neqo-latest vs. quic-go: E V2 CM
neqo-latest vs. quiche: E V2 CM
neqo-latest vs. quinn: V2 CM
neqo-latest vs. s2n-quic: Z V2
neqo-latest vs. tquic: E V2 CM

neqo-latest as server

aioquic vs. neqo-latest: E
chrome vs. neqo-latest: H DC LR C20 M S R Z B U E A L1 L2 C1 C2 6 V2 BP BA CM
go-x-net vs. neqo-latest: C20 S R Z 3 E L1 C1 V2
kwik vs. neqo-latest: E
lsquic vs. neqo-latest: Z U
msquic vs. neqo-latest: 3 E
mvfst vs. neqo-latest: C20 S R U E V2
openssl vs. neqo-latest: Z U E L1 C1 V2
quic-go vs. neqo-latest: E V2
s2n-quic vs. neqo-latest: C20 Z U V2
tquic vs. neqo-latest: C20 U E V2
xquic vs. neqo-latest: E V2

Nov 12 '25 07:11 github-actions[bot]

Client/server transfer results

Performance differences relative to b9c32c70e273cd89f25d7f0561e01a083b8bdf03.

Transfer of 33554432 bytes over loopback, min. 100 runs. All unit-less numbers are in milliseconds.

Client vs. server (params)	Mean ± σ	Min	Max	MiB/s ± σ	Δ `main`	Δ `main`
google vs. google	455.4 ± 4.4	450.0	466.7	70.3 ± 7.3
google vs. neqo (cubic, paced)	278.1 ± 4.5	268.8	286.8	115.1 ± 7.1	1.2	0.4%
msquic vs. msquic	187.8 ± 63.8	143.9	407.4	170.4 ± 0.5
msquic vs. neqo (cubic, paced)	224.7 ± 60.4	159.9	394.8	142.4 ± 0.5	10.1	4.7%
neqo vs. google (cubic, paced)	756.3 ± 4.2	750.2	770.4	42.3 ± 7.6	-0.3	-0.0%
neqo vs. msquic (cubic, paced)	156.5 ± 4.7	149.4	173.0	204.5 ± 6.8	-0.9	-0.6%
neqo vs. neqo (cubic)	94.7 ± 4.8	85.2	107.6	337.9 ± 6.7	1.3	1.4%
neqo vs. neqo (cubic, paced)	94.2 ± 4.3	85.9	103.4	339.9 ± 7.4	0.1	0.1%
neqo vs. neqo (reno)	93.2 ± 4.6	85.7	102.7	343.2 ± 7.0	-0.9	-1.0%
neqo vs. neqo (reno, paced)	95.0 ± 4.3	88.2	105.4	336.7 ± 7.4	0.1	0.1%
neqo vs. quiche (cubic, paced)	191.7 ± 4.2	186.1	203.0	166.9 ± 7.6	:green_heart: -3.1	-1.6%
neqo vs. s2n (cubic, paced)	221.7 ± 4.6	213.5	234.4	144.3 ± 7.0	:broken_heart: 1.4	0.6%
quiche vs. neqo (cubic, paced)	157.3 ± 4.8	145.7	170.4	203.4 ± 6.7	0.3	0.2%
quiche vs. quiche	145.3 ± 4.3	138.9	159.7	220.2 ± 7.4
s2n vs. neqo (cubic, paced)	173.3 ± 4.8	162.7	180.7	184.7 ± 6.7	0.8	0.4%
s2n vs. s2n	251.9 ± 28.5	232.0	350.0	127.0 ± 1.1

Download data for profiler.firefox.com or download performance comparison data.

Nov 12 '25 09:11 github-actions[bot]