Is this a good way to demonstrate the advantage of Nodejs (expressjs) over Rails / Django / etc?

UPDATE

It should not have been a benchmark or a node against a ruby ​​thing (I should leave this more clear in the question, sorry). The bottom line was to compare and demonstrate the difference between locking and not locking and how easy it is to write without locking. I could compare using EventMachine, but node has this inline, so it was an obvious choice.

I am trying to demonstrate to some friends the advantage of nodejs (and its frameworks) compared to other technologies, which is very easy to understand mainly non-blocking IO.

So, I tried to create a (very small) Expressjs and Rails application that will execute an HTTP request in google and read the resulting html length.

As expected (on my computer) Expressjs was 10 times faster than Rails via ab (see below). My task is if this is a "valid" way to demonstrate the main advantage that nodejs provides over other technologies. (or is there some kind of caching in Expressjs / Connect?)

Here is the code I used.

Expressjs

exports.index = function(req, res) {
    var http = require('http')
    var options = { host: 'www.google.com', port: 80, method: 'GET' }
    var html = ''
    var googleReq = http.request(options, function(googleRes) {
        googleRes.on('data', function(chunk) {
            html += chunk
        })
        googleRes.on('end', function() {
            res.render('index', { title: 'Express', html: html })
        })
    });
    googleReq.end();
};

Rails

require 'net/http'

class WelcomeController < ApplicationController
  def index
    @html = Net::HTTP.get(URI("http://www.google.com"))
    render layout: false
  end
end

These are the results of the test AB

Expressjs

Server Software:        
Server Hostname:        localhost
Server Port:            3000

Document Path:          /
Document Length:        244 bytes

Concurrency Level:      20
Time taken for tests:   1.718 seconds
Complete requests:      50
Failed requests:        0
Write errors:           0
Total transferred:      25992 bytes
HTML transferred:       12200 bytes
Requests per second:    29.10 [#/sec] (mean)
Time per request:       687.315 [ms] (mean)
Time per request:       34.366 [ms] (mean, across all concurrent requests)
Transfer rate:          14.77 [Kbytes/sec] received

Connection Times (ms)
              min  mean[+/-sd] median   max
Connect:        0    0   0.1      0       0
Processing:   319  581 110.6    598     799
Waiting:      319  581 110.6    598     799
Total:        319  581 110.6    598     799

Percentage of the requests served within a certain time (ms)
  50%    598
  66%    608
  75%    622
  80%    625
  90%    762
  95%    778
  98%    799
  99%    799
 100%    799 (longest request)

Rails

Server Software:        WEBrick/1.3.1
Server Hostname:        localhost
Server Port:            3001

Document Path:          /
Document Length:        65 bytes

Concurrency Level:      20
Time taken for tests:   17.615 seconds
Complete requests:      50
Failed requests:        0
Write errors:           0
Total transferred:      21850 bytes
HTML transferred:       3250 bytes
Requests per second:    2.84 [#/sec] (mean)
Time per request:       7046.166 [ms] (mean)
Time per request:       352.308 [ms] (mean, across all concurrent requests)
Transfer rate:          1.21 [Kbytes/sec] received

Connection Times (ms)
              min  mean[+/-sd] median   max
Connect:        0  180 387.8      0     999
Processing:   344 5161 2055.9   6380    7983
Waiting:      344 5160 2056.0   6380    7982
Total:        345 5341 2069.2   6386    7983

Percentage of the requests served within a certain time (ms)
  50%   6386
  66%   6399
  75%   6402
  80%   6408
  90%   7710
  95%   7766
  98%   7983
  99%   7983
 100%   7983 (longest request)