StackShareStackShare
Follow on
StackShare

Discover and share technology stacks from companies around the world.

Follow on

© 2025 StackShare. All rights reserved.

Product

  • Stacks
  • Tools
  • Feed

Company

  • About
  • Contact

Legal

  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms of Service
  1. Stackups
  2. Application & Data
  3. Platform as a Service
  4. Web Servers
  5. Apache Tomcat vs Unicorn vs nginx

Apache Tomcat vs Unicorn vs nginx

OverviewComparisonAlternatives

Overview

NGINX
NGINX
Stacks115.0K
Followers61.9K
Votes5.5K
GitHub Stars28.4K
Forks7.6K
Unicorn
Unicorn
Stacks479
Followers401
Votes295
GitHub Stars1.5K
Forks269
Apache Tomcat
Apache Tomcat
Stacks16.9K
Followers12.6K
Votes201
GitHub Stars8.0K
Forks5.3K

Apache Tomcat vs Unicorn vs nginx: What are the differences?

# Apache Tomcat vs Unicorn and Nginx: Key Differences

Apache Tomcat, Unicorn, and Nginx are popular web servers and application servers used in web development. Understanding their key differences can help developers choose the right tool for their projects.

1. **Architecture**: Apache Tomcat is a Java-based application server primarily used to host Java Servlets and JavaServer Pages (JSP), while Unicorn is a Ruby web server that supports Rack applications. Nginx, on the other hand, is a lightweight web server known for its high performance and scalability.

2. **Support for Languages**: Apache Tomcat is specialized for Java-based applications, while Unicorn is tailored for Ruby applications. Nginx, however, supports a wider range of programming languages and can be used as a reverse proxy server for various applications.

3. **Resource Usage**: Apache Tomcat tends to consume more system resources due to its Java-based architecture, while Unicorn and Nginx are known for their efficiency and low resource consumption. This makes Unicorn and Nginx ideal choices for high-traffic websites or applications.

4. **Load Balancing**: Nginx is well-known for its advanced load balancing capabilities, making it a preferred choice for distributing incoming traffic across multiple servers. Apache Tomcat and Unicorn also support load balancing, but Nginx offers more sophisticated features in this area.

5. **Configuration**: Apache Tomcat has a more complex configuration process compared to Unicorn and Nginx, which have simpler and more intuitive configuration settings. Nginx, in particular, has a reputation for its easy configuration syntax and flexibility in setting up server blocks.

6. **Community and Support**: Apache Tomcat has a large and active community support due to its popularity among Java developers. Unicorn and Nginx also have dedicated communities, but Apache Tomcat stands out for its extensive documentation and resources available online.

In Summary, Apache Tomcat, Unicorn, and Nginx differ in terms of architecture, language support, resource usage, load balancing capabilities, configuration complexity, and community support, making them suitable for different types of web development projects.

Share your Stack

Help developers discover the tools you use. Get visibility for your team's tech choices and contribute to the community's knowledge.

View Docs
CLI (Node.js)
or
Manual

Detailed Comparison

NGINX
NGINX
Unicorn
Unicorn
Apache Tomcat
Apache Tomcat

nginx [engine x] is an HTTP and reverse proxy server, as well as a mail proxy server, written by Igor Sysoev. According to Netcraft nginx served or proxied 30.46% of the top million busiest sites in Jan 2018.

Unicorn is an HTTP server for Rack applications designed to only serve fast clients on low-latency, high-bandwidth connections and take advantage of features in Unix/Unix-like kernels. Slow clients should only be served by placing a reverse proxy capable of fully buffering both the the request and response in between Unicorn and slow clients.

Apache Tomcat powers numerous large-scale, mission-critical web applications across a diverse range of industries and organizations.

Statistics
GitHub Stars
28.4K
GitHub Stars
1.5K
GitHub Stars
8.0K
GitHub Forks
7.6K
GitHub Forks
269
GitHub Forks
5.3K
Stacks
115.0K
Stacks
479
Stacks
16.9K
Followers
61.9K
Followers
401
Followers
12.6K
Votes
5.5K
Votes
295
Votes
201
Pros & Cons
Pros
  • 1453
    High-performance http server
  • 895
    Performance
  • 730
    Easy to configure
  • 607
    Open source
  • 530
    Load balancer
Cons
  • 10
    Advanced features require subscription
Pros
  • 81
    Fast
  • 59
    Performance
  • 36
    Web server
  • 30
    Open Source
  • 30
    Very light
Cons
  • 4
    Not multithreaded
Pros
  • 79
    Easy
  • 72
    Java
  • 49
    Popular
  • 1
    Spring web
Cons
  • 3
    Blocking - each http request block a thread
  • 2
    Easy to set up

What are some alternatives to NGINX, Unicorn, Apache Tomcat?

Apache HTTP Server

Apache HTTP Server

The Apache HTTP Server is a powerful and flexible HTTP/1.1 compliant web server. Originally designed as a replacement for the NCSA HTTP Server, it has grown to be the most popular web server on the Internet.

Microsoft IIS

Microsoft IIS

Internet Information Services (IIS) for Windows Server is a flexible, secure and manageable Web server for hosting anything on the Web. From media streaming to web applications, IIS's scalable and open architecture is ready to handle the most demanding tasks.

Passenger

Passenger

Phusion Passenger is a web server and application server, designed to be fast, robust and lightweight. It takes a lot of complexity out of deploying web apps, adds powerful enterprise-grade features that are useful in production, and makes administration much easier and less complex.

Gunicorn

Gunicorn

Gunicorn is a pre-fork worker model ported from Ruby's Unicorn project. The Gunicorn server is broadly compatible with various web frameworks, simply implemented, light on server resources, and fairly speedy.

Jetty

Jetty

Jetty is used in a wide variety of projects and products, both in development and production. Jetty can be easily embedded in devices, tools, frameworks, application servers, and clusters. See the Jetty Powered page for more uses of Jetty.

lighttpd

lighttpd

lighttpd has a very low memory footprint compared to other webservers and takes care of cpu-load. Its advanced feature-set (FastCGI, CGI, Auth, Output-Compression, URL-Rewriting and many more) make lighttpd the perfect webserver-software for every server that suffers load problems.

Swoole

Swoole

It is an open source high-performance network framework using an event-driven, asynchronous, non-blocking I/O model which makes it scalable and efficient.

Puma

Puma

Unlike other Ruby Webservers, Puma was built for speed and parallelism. Puma is a small library that provides a very fast and concurrent HTTP 1.1 server for Ruby web applications.

Caddy

Caddy

Caddy 2 is a powerful, enterprise-ready, open source web server with automatic HTTPS written in Go.

Cowboy

Cowboy

Cowboy aims to provide a complete HTTP stack in a small code base. It is optimized for low latency and low memory usage, in part because it uses binary strings. Cowboy provides routing capabilities, selectively dispatching requests to handlers written in Erlang.

Related Comparisons

Bootstrap
Materialize

Bootstrap vs Materialize

Laravel
Django

Django vs Laravel vs Node.js

Bootstrap
Foundation

Bootstrap vs Foundation vs Material UI

Node.js
Spring Boot

Node.js vs Spring-Boot

Liquibase
Flyway

Flyway vs Liquibase