# How does Julia compare with Nim, Go and Crystal for Artificial Intelligence?

**URL:** <https://discourse.julialang.org/t/how-does-julia-compare-with-nim-go-and-crystal-for-artificial-intelligence/63631>\
**Category:** Offtopic\
**Tags:** question\
**Created:** [June 27, 2021, 5:52am UTC](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/how-does-julia-compare-with-nim-go-and-crystal-for-artificial-intelligence/63631 "2021-06-27T05:52:31Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 1\
**Showing post:** 5

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![jling](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/julialang/user_avatar/discourse.julialang.org/jling/32/212909_2.png) [@jling](https://discourse.julialang.org/u/jling)\
**Post date:** [June 27, 2021, 1:54pm UTC](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/how-does-julia-compare-with-nim-go-and-crystal-for-artificial-intelligence/63631/5 "2021-06-27T13:54:32Z")

</div>

> [@development\_mentor](#):
>
> calculating digits of pi, matrix multiplication(by some tests)

these are examples of highly optimized (down to assembly code) subroutine, there’s not reason to think Julia should magically be faster.

I don’t know what that bio stuff benchmark is doing, see:

> [@lhe/Biofast benchmark | FASTQ parsing \[Julia,Nim,Crystal,Python,...\]](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/lhe-biofast-benchmark-fastq-parsing-julia-nim-crystal-python/39747/53):
>
> Just to be more explicit about the complete logical fallacy here, extrapolation from pre-v1.0 makes absolutely no sense. In the last few months before v1.0 was out, all of the dev discussions were like “okay, we have 6 months left to break anything. After v1.0, they are fixed forever. So what are all of the syntax choices you don’t like? What are all of the naming choices you think are inconsistent? What are all of the weird workarounds you think should be removed? Okay, let’s triage, make decis…

but there are plenty of examples where Julia is faster than X:

> **[Julia: Fast as Fortran, Beautiful as Python](https://fortran-lang.discourse.group/t/julia-fast-as-fortran-beautiful-as-python/1405)**
>
> Here is an article and the associated Hacker News discussion where they compare Fortran and Julia and concluded that Fortran was slower: Julia: Faster than Fortran, cleaner than Numpy | Hacker News Here is the Fortran benchmark: ...

And finally, the point is not “Julia is always faster than everyone in any cases no matter what”, that’s just impossible. Also it doesn’t matter, hell, if python is just 10x slower in almost all cases, say, compare to today’s Julia. we won’t need millions of lines of code for Numpy Numba and numerous C/C++ code piles on top of each other and Julia may never be invented in the first place.

To this end, I don’t see how Nim, Go, Crystal, Rust are replacement: there’s not enough user (think grad students in science who never took formal training in CE) facing high level library and scripting ability.

---

_[View the full topic](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/how-does-julia-compare-with-nim-go-and-crystal-for-artificial-intelligence/63631)._