LiteSpeed vs Apache Print
Feature Apache 1.3/2.0 LiteSpeed 2.1
Model Process/Threads Event-driven/Asynchronous
Static File Performance 1x 6x*
PHP Performance 1x 1.5x*
Perl Performance 1x 2x*
CGI Performance 1x 2x*
PHP/Ruby LSAPI No Built-in
Ruby on Rails Integration No Yes
Memory Footprint Large (process/threads) Small (event-driven)
Scalability Poor (~1000 concurrent clients) Excellent (20,000+ concurrent clients, SMP Linear)
Administration Commandline Web GUI
Configuration Format text XML
Upgrades Manual Auto+Manual
Product Support 3rd Party 24/7 Support
High Performance Proxy Add-on Built-in
Static Load Balancer 3rd Party Built-in
LDAP 3rd Party Built-in
Anti-DDoS 3rd Party Built-in
Connection Throttle 3rd Party Built-in
Bandwidth Throttle 3rd Party Built-in

 

Summary

Websites that wither under pressure from the slashdot/digg-effect more often than not use the status-quo Apache web server. Apache is the stable market-share champ from Apache foundation (www.apache.org) that is showing its age and has not enjoyed an evolution performance upgrade in decades: simply perform some benchmark search queries on Yahoo/Google and one will find that Apache 2.0 is barely if at all faster than Apache 1.3 it replaces. When it comes to performance and scalability, LiteSpeed is rightfully proud to proclaim that Apache is not in the same league.

Based the highest performing programming architecture, asynchronous event-driven model, LiteSpeed Technologies has created a world-class web server that not only breaks the status-quo when it comes to previously accepted performance/cost benchmark but also aspires to set a new standard where other web servers are compared to.

* Based on benchmarks performed by LiteSpeed Technologies. Do not just trust our word for it, perform you own benchmarks and prepare to be pleasantly surprised.