An updated benchmark is certainly welcome, especially with the following DB’s:
- TigerGraph - They claim substantial performance gains
- ArangoDB - They claim ~2x faster than neo4j
- OrientDB - They claim being 10x faster than neo4j
While these benchmarks cannot be compared to each other, it gives a very clear picture that neo isn’t exactly setting the standard.
It would also be very meaningful to add a cost ratio, say total cost per 100k ops/sec because some of these systems require a cluster of substantial size (600 nodes) to reach a million ops per second. Naturally, a very significant question is, which of these systems runs the most workload on the fewest nodes and what exactly would that cost me to run?
If a system is roughly equal in performance but cost me only a fraction on a scale, it is clearly the more economical choice and usually, these win the race in the long-run.