Benchmarks
Empirical performance comparison of 38 C# and 10 Python serialization libraries using identical test data and measurement methodologies.
Quick Access
| Report | Description |
|---|---|
| Serialization Categories | How serializers are classified (JSON, Binary, Schema) |
| Analysis Methodology | Statistical methods and data processing pipeline |
| Test Data Configuration | Test data types and generation rules |
| Detailed Report | Raw performance tables with latency, throughput, and size metrics |
| Performance | Statistical visualizations showing performance, variance and outliers |
Summary Statistics
C# Top Performers
Top performers by ops/sec.
| Rank | Serializer | Test Data | Mode | Ops/Sec |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | MS Bond Fast | Integer | string | 804,528 |
| 2 | NetSerializer | Integer | string | 419,342 |
| 3 | MS Bond Compact | Integer | string | 320,888 |
Python Top Performers
Top performers by ops/sec.
| Rank | Serializer | Test Data | Mode | Ops/Sec |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | msgspec | Integer | bytes | 544,088 |
| 2 | orjson | Integer | bytes | 392,197 |
| 3 | msgspec | Integer | stream | 290,684 |
Key Findings
- Binary formats (MessagePack, Protobuf) consistently outperform text formats (JSON, XML)
- Schema-driven serializers achieve smaller payload sizes by omitting field names
- Zero-allocation techniques in modern C# serializers (MemoryPack, FlatBuffers) minimize GC pressure
- Python's orjson and msgspec (C-extensions) are 10-100x faster than pure-Python alternatives
Raw Data
Download complete benchmark results: