TypeScript vs Go: When to Use Each in Enterprise Systems

Having built production systems in both TypeScript and Go at Vitrifi and other organizations, I've developed clear preferences for when to use each. Neither is universally better—the right choice depends on your specific context.

Go Strengths

Superior Performance

Go compiles to native machine code with no runtime interpretation. For CPU-intensive workloads:

Benchmarks from our services:

JSON serialization: Go 3-5x faster than Node.js
Complex calculations: Go 10-20x faster than TypeScript
Cold start time: Go ~50ms vs Node.js ~200-500ms

This matters for high-throughput services processing thousands of requests per second.

Excellent Concurrency Model

Goroutines and channels make concurrent programming intuitive:

// Spawn thousands of concurrent operations trivially
for _, item := range items {
    go processItem(item)
}

Goroutines are incredibly lightweight (~2KB initial stack) compared to threads or even Node.js async contexts.

Single Binary Deployment

Go compiles to a single statically-linked binary:

No runtime dependencies
Simple Docker images (FROM scratch possible)
Easy distribution and deployment
No "works on my machine" issues

Low Memory Footprint

Go services typically use 10-50MB of memory compared to 100-500MB for comparable Node.js services. At scale, this translates to significant cost savings.

Strong Standard Library

Go's standard library handles most needs without external dependencies:

HTTP server and client
JSON encoding/decoding
Cryptography
Database drivers
Testing framework

Fewer dependencies means fewer security vulnerabilities and easier maintenance.

TypeScript Strengths

Larger Ecosystem

npm has packages for everything:

ORMs (Prisma, TypeORM, Drizzle)
Validation (Zod, Yup, Joi)
API frameworks (Express, Fastify, NestJS)
Testing utilities (Jest, Vitest)
Countless integrations

For niche requirements, npm usually has a solution. Go's ecosystem, while growing, is smaller.

Easier Team Scaling

JavaScript/TypeScript developers are abundant:

Larger talent pool for hiring
Lower onboarding time for JavaScript developers
Full-stack developers can contribute to backend

Go developers are rarer and often more expensive.

Full-Stack Code Sharing

With TypeScript on both ends:

Share types between frontend and backend
Reuse validation logic
Consistent developer experience
Easier debugging across boundaries

Faster Development Iteration

TypeScript's development loop is faster:

No compilation step (with ts-node or tsx)
Hot reload in development
Rich IDE support with instant feedback
Faster prototyping

Richer Type System

TypeScript's type system is more expressive:

Union and intersection types
Mapped types and conditional types
Template literal types
Better type inference

This expressiveness helps model complex business domains accurately.

Performance Deep Dive

When Performance Matters

Go wins decisively for:

High-frequency trading or real-time systems
Services handling 10,000+ requests/second
CPU-intensive calculations
Memory-constrained environments
Serverless cold starts

Performance difference is negligible for:

Typical CRUD APIs
I/O-bound services (database, external APIs)
Low-to-medium traffic services (< 1000 req/s)

Most enterprise services are I/O-bound, where Node.js's async model performs well.

Real-World Comparison

At Vitrifi, we had both Go and Node.js services:

Go services (event processing, real-time):

99th percentile latency: 2ms
Memory usage: 30MB
Throughput: 50,000 events/second

Node.js services (API gateway, business logic):

99th percentile latency: 15ms
Memory usage: 150MB
Throughput: 5,000 requests/second

Both were appropriate for their use cases.

Developer Experience Comparison

Go Developer Experience

Pros:

Fast compilation
Consistent formatting (gofmt)
Excellent error messages
Simple dependency management (Go modules)

Cons:

Verbose error handling
Limited generics (improving)
Less expressive than TypeScript
Steeper learning curve for JavaScript developers

TypeScript Developer Experience

Pros:

Rich IDE integration (VSCode)
Expressive type system
Familiar to web developers
Rapid iteration

Cons:

Configuration complexity (tsconfig, build tools)
Runtime vs compile-time behavior differences
Ecosystem fragmentation (multiple test runners, bundlers)
"any" escape hatch can undermine type safety

Operational Considerations

Deployment

Go:

Single binary simplifies deployment
Minimal Docker images (5-20MB)
No runtime updates needed

Node.js:

Larger images (100-500MB)
Node.js version management
Potential security patches for runtime

Monitoring and Debugging

Both have excellent observability tooling:

Prometheus metrics
OpenTelemetry tracing
Structured logging

Go's profiling tools (pprof) are particularly powerful for performance debugging.

My Recommendations

Use Go For

High-performance services: When milliseconds matter Infrastructure tooling: CLI tools, proxies, load balancers Heavy concurrency: Services managing many connections Microservices with simple logic: CRUD without complex business rules Serverless functions: Faster cold starts, lower costs

Use TypeScript For

Complex business logic: Domain modeling with rich types API services: Especially with GraphQL Full-stack teams: Consistent language across the stack Rapid prototyping: Get to market faster Heavy npm dependency needs: Leverage the ecosystem

Mixed Stacks Work

At Vitrifi:

Go for event processing and real-time services
TypeScript for API gateway and business logic services
Shared protobuf definitions for interoperability

The boundary was clean: Go handled the "hot path," TypeScript handled the "complex path."

Key Takeaways

Go for performance and simplicity: When you need raw speed or simple deployment
TypeScript for productivity and expressiveness: When development velocity matters more than runtime performance
I/O-bound services: Performance difference is minimal; choose based on team skills
CPU-bound services: Go wins significantly
Consider team skills: The best language is one your team can use effectively
Mixed stacks are valid: Use each where it shines