Performance & Benchmarks

Where WorkflowForge sits on BenchmarkDotNet runs: internal numbers, comparisons, targets, and tuning notes.

Version: 2.1.1
Test System: Windows 11 (25H2), Intel 11th Gen i7-1185G7, .NET SDK 10.0.103
Runtimes: .NET 10.0.3, .NET 8.0.24, .NET Framework 4.8.1
BenchmarkDotNet: v0.15.8, 50 iterations
Last Updated: March 2026

Table of Contents

  1. Overview
  2. Internal Performance Benchmarks
  3. Competitive Performance Summary
  4. Performance Targets and Guidelines
  5. Optimization Guide
  6. Benchmark Methodology
  7. Version History
  8. Related Documentation

Overview

The engine optimizes for low-latency in-process orchestration:

  • Microseconds on the hot path: simple ops median about 11–80μs in the harness.
  • Small baseline: ~3.33KB, flat from 10 through 500 iterations in the minimal workflow test.
  • Concurrency: about 8.0x with 8 workflows and 15.9x with 16 in the same suite.
  • Property bag data flow: no per-step serialization or reflection on that path.
  • No host-owned worker pool: parallelism is explicit (ForEachWorkflowOperation, your schedulers).

On .NET 10, 8, and .NET Framework 4.8 the comparative harness reports 13–511x faster wall times and 6–575x lower allocations than Workflow Core and Elsa for the scripted scenarios we mirrored. Ratios are tied to those scripts and hardware, not every app.

511x
Faster (State Machine)
575x
Less Memory
11μs
Min Execution Time
3.33KB
Memory Baseline

Internal Performance Benchmarks

These internal benchmarks measure WorkflowForge in isolation across all three runtimes:

Metric .NET 8.0 .NET 10.0 .NET FX 4.8
Operation Execution 12–80μs median 11–78μs median 9–55μs median
Operation Creation 1.65–1.9μs 1.4–1.65μs 1.2–1.6μs
Workflow Throughput 50–292μs (1–50 ops) 47–258μs (1–50 ops) 33–345μs (1–50 ops)
Memory Baseline 3.33KB (constant) 3.33KB (constant) N/A‡
Concurrent Scaling 8.0x (8 wf), 15.9x (16 wf) 8.0x (8 wf), 15.9x (16 wf) 8.1x (8 wf), 16.2x (16 wf)

‡ .NET Framework 4.8 does not report memory allocation metrics in BenchmarkDotNet.

Observations

  • Custom operations allocate the least here (456–592 B per run in the harness).
  • Logging operations post the shortest times (10.85–12.1μs).
  • The minimal-allocation workflow holds 3,408 B from 10 through 500 iterations.
  • Ordinary paths in this matrix stayed off Gen2.

For operation-by-operation results, throughput scaling, memory patterns, and concurrency charts, see Internal Benchmarks.

Competitive Performance Summary

WorkflowForge is run beside Workflow Core and Elsa on twelve shared scenarios (same script) on .NET 10.0, 8.0, and .NET Framework 4.8. Peak ratio in our log: 511x wall time (state machine vs Elsa, .NET 10.0). Shortest median: 7μs (creation overhead, .NET FX 4.8). Aggregate bands from the tables: 13–511x time, 6–575x allocation.

Competitive Benchmark Summary (Median, 50 iterations)

Execution Time (.NET 8.0)

# Scenario WorkflowForge Workflow Core Elsa Speed Advantage
1 Sequential (10 ops) 377μs 9,879μs 19,168μs 26-51x
2 Data Passing (10 ops) 321μs 9,751μs 19,164μs 30-60x
3 Conditional (10 ops) 301μs 9,248μs 19,361μs 31-64x
4 Loop (50 items) 495μs 30,742μs 58,347μs 62-118x
5 Concurrent (8 workers) 357μs 42,054μs 103,024μs 118-289x
6 Error Handling 114μs 1,349μs 7,737μs 12-68x
7 Creation Overhead 11μs 819μs 2,328μs 74-212x
8 Complete Lifecycle 59μs N/A 9,723μs 165x
9 State Machine (25) 71μs 21,683μs 34,426μs 305-485x
10 Long Running* 72ms 71ms 83ms Memory-focused
11 Parallel (16 ops) 63μs 2,654μs 24,940μs 42-396x
12 Event-Driven* 7.1ms 7.4ms 19.9ms 1.0-2.8x

*Long Running and Event-Driven are delay-bound; advantage is in memory.

Execution Time (.NET 10.0)

# Scenario WorkflowForge Workflow Core Elsa Speed Advantage
1 Sequential (10 ops) 422μs 13,828μs 18,676μs 33-44x
2 Data Passing (10 ops) 325μs 11,651μs 18,510μs 36-57x
3 Conditional (10 ops) 333μs 13,427μs 19,166μs 40-58x
4 Loop (50 items) 450μs 35,320μs 54,827μs 78-122x
5 Concurrent (8 workers) 372μs 47,114μs 87,491μs 127-235x
6 Error Handling 70μs 1,498μs 7,694μs 21-110x
7 Creation Overhead 11μs 1,001μs 2,245μs 91-204x
8 Complete Lifecycle 36μs N/A 9,877μs 274x
9 State Machine (25) 65μs 29,537μs 33,062μs 455-511x
10 Long Running* 72ms 71ms 84ms Memory-focused
11 Parallel (16 ops) 56μs 2,861μs 24,638μs 51-440x
12 Event-Driven* 7.1ms 8.3ms 20.6ms 1.2-2.9x

Execution Time (.NET Framework 4.8)

# Scenario WorkflowForge Workflow Core Speed Advantage
1 Sequential (10 ops) 122μs 6,743μs 55x
2 Data Passing (10 ops) 118μs 6,684μs 57x
3 Conditional (10 ops) 118μs 6,562μs 56x
4 Loop (50 items) 350μs 34,137μs 98x
5 Concurrent (8 workers) 167μs 41,934μs 251x
6 Error Handling 88μs 4,471μs 51x
7 Creation Overhead 7μs 260μs 37x
9 State Machine (25) 61μs 18,486μs 303x
11 Parallel (16 ops) 35μs 1,754μs 50x

Elsa does not support .NET Framework 4.8 and is excluded from this comparison.

Competitive Memory Summary (.NET 8.0)

# Scenario WorkflowForge Workflow Core Elsa Memory Advantage
1 Sequential (10 ops) 17.72KB 429KB 2,993KB 24-169x
2 Data Passing (10 ops) 16.36KB 429KB 2,987KB 26-183x
3 Conditional (10 ops) 19.48KB 428KB 2,984KB 22-153x
4 Loop (50 items) 96.3KB 2,122KB 10,908KB 22-113x
5 Concurrent (8) 154.7KB 3,231KB 19,114KB 21-124x
6 Error Handling 8.38KB 47.0KB 1,072KB 6-128x
7 Creation Overhead 3.72KB 129KB 578KB 35-155x
8 Complete Lifecycle 3.70KB N/A 1,510KB 408x
9 State Machine (25) 23.92KB 1,105KB 5,938KB 46-248x
10 Long Running 5.12KB 266KB 2,215KB 52-433x
11 Parallel (16 ops) 8.23KB 125KB 4,652KB 15-565x
12 Event-Driven 3.48KB 37.5KB 1,032KB 11-297x

Competitive Memory Summary (.NET 10.0)

# Scenario WorkflowForge Workflow Core Elsa Memory Advantage
1 Sequential (10 ops) 17.72KB 427KB 3,024KB 24-171x
2 Data Passing (10 ops) 16.36KB 425KB 3,024KB 26-185x
3 Conditional (10 ops) 19.48KB 426KB 2,984KB 22-153x
4 Loop (50 items) 96.9KB 2,086KB 10,908KB 22-113x
5 Concurrent (8) 154.7KB 3,171KB 19,109KB 21-124x
6 Error Handling 7.02KB 50.7KB 1,056KB 7-150x
7 Creation Overhead 3.72KB 125KB 537KB 34-146x
8 Complete Lifecycle 3.70KB N/A 1,513KB 409x
9 State Machine (25) 23.92KB 1,090KB 5,966KB 46-249x
10 Long Running 5.12KB 266KB 2,244KB 52-438x
11 Parallel (16 ops) 7.96KB 126KB 4,576KB 16-575x
12 Event-Driven 3.48KB 40.0KB 999KB 11-287x

Competitive Memory Summary (.NET Framework 4.8)

# Scenario WorkflowForge Workflow Core Memory Advantage
1 Sequential (10 ops) 40.00KB 560KB 14x
2 Data Passing (10 ops) 40.00KB 544KB 14x
3 Conditional (10 ops) 48.00KB 552KB 12x
4 Loop (50 items) 176KB 2,512KB 14x
5 Concurrent (8) 272KB 3,816KB 14x
9 State Machine (25) 24.00KB 1,344KB 56x

Elsa does not support .NET Framework 4.8 and is excluded. Memory allocation metrics are not reported by BenchmarkDotNet for .NET Framework 4.8 in all scenarios.

Key takeaways

  • Concurrent execution: up to 289x faster than Elsa in the concurrent scenario on this setup
  • State machine: up to 511x on .NET 10.0 for the 25-transition sweep
  • Sequential workflows: 26–57x across runtimes with small reported allocations
  • Memory baseline: 3.48 KB (event-driven competitive scenario) and 3.33 KB (MinimalAllocationWorkflow internal suite)
  • Cross-runtime: numbers below repeat on .NET 10.0, 8.0, and .NET Framework 4.8 on the same machine

Notes:

  • Results captured on Windows 11 (25H2), Intel i7-1185G7, 50 iterations.
  • .NET SDK 10.0.103, runtimes: .NET 10.0.3, .NET 8.0.24, .NET Framework 4.8.1.
  • BenchmarkDotNet v0.15.8.
  • Elsa does not support .NET Framework 4.8; those results are excluded.
State Machine Execution (25 Transitions)
State machine, 25 transitions (.NET 10.0); values from tables below
65μs
29.5ms
33.1ms
.NET 10.0
71μs
21.7ms
34.4ms
.NET 8.0
61μs
18.5ms
.NET FX 4.8
WorkflowForge
Workflow Core
Elsa Workflows

For scenario breakdowns, parameter sweeps, and architectural comparisons, see Competitive Analysis.

Performance Targets and Guidelines

WorkflowForge maintains the following performance targets:

Metric Target Status
Operation execution <100μs median for simple operations Met (11–80μs)
Workflow creation <5μs overhead Met (1.4–1.9μs)
Memory baseline <5KB for minimal workflows Met (3.33KB)
GC pressure No Gen2 collections in typical workloads Met
Concurrent scaling Near-linear Met (8.0x for 8, 15.9x for 16)

Targets below come straight from the same BenchmarkDotNet matrix. Keep workflows on custom ops, modest property payloads, and tight middleware stacks if you need the same envelope.

Optimization Guide

1. Choose the Right Operation Type

  • Custom class-based operations use the least memory in benchmarks (456–592 B); they are the default choice when you care about allocation.
  • Logging operations measure fastest (10.85–12.1μs) for tiny steps.
  • Delegate operations are handy but add roughly 5–10μs versus a custom operation in the same harness.

2. Reuse Workflow Definitions

Build workflows once and execute many times. Creation overhead is minimal (1.4–1.9μs) but reuse is still recommended for high-throughput scenarios.

3. Optimize Data Passing

  • Use foundry.Properties for all data flow
  • Cache property reads in loops instead of repeated lookups
  • Avoid large object allocations in hot paths

4. Use Concurrency

Use ForEachWorkflowOperation for parallel execution of independent operations. Concurrency scales near-linearly (8.0x for 8 workflows, 15.9x for 16).

5. Minimize Middleware

Add only necessary middleware. Each middleware adds ~1–5μs overhead per operation.

6. Avoid Large Object Allocations

Large allocations (>85KB) trigger Gen2 GC and degrade throughput. Keep operation payloads small where possible.

7. Use .NET 10.0 Where Available

.NET 10.0 shows improved exception handling (70μs vs 114μs) and some operation gains.

For detailed code examples and patterns, see Internal Benchmarks and Operations.

Benchmark Methodology

Configuration

  • Framework: BenchmarkDotNet v0.15.8
  • Runtimes: .NET 10.0.3, .NET 8.0.24, .NET Framework 4.8.1
  • Iterations: 50 per benchmark
  • Warmup: 5 iterations
  • Invocation: 1 per iteration

Hardware

  • OS: Windows 11 (25H2)
  • CPU: Intel 11th Gen i7-1185G7
  • SDK: .NET SDK 10.0.103

Statistical Approach

  • Median values used for comparison (more stable than mean)
  • Standard deviation < 20% of mean for most scenarios
  • P95 values available for consistency verification
  • All scenarios implement identical logic across frameworks

Reproduction

Internal benchmarks:

cd src/benchmarks/WorkflowForge.Benchmarks
dotnet run -c Release

Competitive benchmarks:

cd src/benchmarks/WorkflowForge.Benchmarks.Comparative
dotnet run -c Release

BenchmarkDotNet writes output under BenchmarkDotNet.Artifacts/results/. Expect full comparative runs to take about 30–60 minutes.

Version History

Version 2.1.1 (current, March 2026)

  • Multi-target .NET 10.0, .NET 8.0, .NET Framework 4.8
  • Sealed operation classes
  • ConfigureAwait optimization
  • Compensation always attempts RestoreAsync (no-op default)

Version 2.0.0 (January 2026)

  • Initial release with 12 competitive scenarios
  • Head-to-head comparison with Workflow Core and Elsa Workflows