- bench/ reproducible harness: instant mock backend + Apache Bench (ab -k -r) - measures gateway overhead in passthrough mode (apples-to-apples) - BENCHMARKS.md: methodology, caveats, results (cortiq ~57k rps p99 1ms vs Portkey ~5.8k p99 9ms vs LiteLLM 4-workers ~1.2k p99 59ms) - README (EN+RU): Performance section + highlight Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
3.9 KiB
Gateway latency benchmark
How much latency does the gateway itself add? For an LLM proxy the model call dominates wall-clock time, but the gateway's own overhead is what differs between products — and it compounds across the many calls an agent makes. This benchmark isolates that overhead and compares Cortiq Gateway with LiteLLM and Portkey.
Reproduce on your own hardware:
bash bench/run.sh(see Methodology).
TL;DR
Every gateway proxies the same instant mock backend in passthrough mode, under
identical load (ab -k -r -c 20 -n 5000). Latency is in milliseconds.
| Gateway | Throughput (req/s) | p50 | p90 | p99 | mean |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cortiq Gateway (Rust) | ~57,300 | 0 ms | 1 ms | 1 ms | 0.35 ms |
| Portkey Gateway (Node) | ~5,800 | 3 ms | 5 ms | 9 ms | 3.5 ms |
| LiteLLM (Python, 4 workers) | ~1,200 | 9 ms | 37 ms | 59 ms | 16.6 ms |
| mock-direct (no gateway) | ~29,000 | 1 ms | 1 ms | 3 ms | 0.7 ms |
On this machine Cortiq adds sub-millisecond p99 overhead and sustains ~10× the throughput of Portkey and ~47× of LiteLLM. The gap is architectural: a Rust / Tokio gateway uses every core in one process, with no interpreter or GC in the hot path.
Absolute numbers depend on hardware; the ratios between gateways are the point. Run
bench/run.shto get numbers for your environment.
Why this matters
Agentic workloads make many gateway calls per task (plan → sub-tasks → tool calls → synthesis). Overhead that looks small per call (tens of ms) multiplies across a run and caps the throughput a single instance can serve. Lower, more predictable tail latency (p99) is the developer-facing differentiator when the model time is equal.
Methodology
- Isolate gateway overhead. A tiny, dependency-free Node mock (
bench/mock.js) returns a fixed OpenAI-compatible completion instantly. So measured latency is the gateway's own cost, not model time. Every gateway proxies this same mock. - Apples-to-apples. Each gateway runs in passthrough / pinned mode (no routing
or model-selection logic) so we compare raw proxy cost. Cortiq's intelligent routing
(
cortiq-auto) adds one classifier round-trip — that's a feature, measured separately, not folded into this overhead number. - Load. Apache Bench, keep-alive, tolerant of length variance:
ab -k -r -c 20 -n 5000 -p bench/body.json -T application/json. - Fair to each runtime. Cortiq = one process (Tokio, multi-core). Portkey = one Node process (event loop). LiteLLM = 4 uvicorn workers (its recommended multi-process setup; a single Python worker is GIL-bound to one core and scores ~860 req/s).
- Same box, localhost, warm processes, results are representative of one run.
Caveats (read me)
- This measures gateway overhead only. Real requests are dominated by model latency, which is identical regardless of gateway — but overhead and tail latency are not.
- Localhost + mock backend removes network/model variance on purpose. Your absolute
numbers will differ; reproduce with
bench/run.sh. abreports LiteLLM "Failed requests" as a non-zero count — these are response content-length variations, not HTTP errors (all responses are200, verified).- Tested versions: Cortiq Gateway (this repo,
--release), LiteLLM proxy viauvicorn litellm.proxy.proxy_server:app --workers 4, Portkey@portkey-ai/gateway, Apache Bench. Hardware: Apple Silicon, macOS.
Reproduce
# prerequisites: node, ab (Apache Bench), a release build of the gateway
cargo build --release
# optional competitors (the harness auto-detects them):
pip install 'litellm[proxy]' uvicorn
npm install -g @portkey-ai/gateway
# run (tune load via env)
CONC=20 REQ=5000 bash bench/run.sh
The harness (bench/run.sh) starts the mock, then benchmarks the mock
directly and each available gateway, printing a throughput / p50 / p90 / p99 table.