Chris, very handy post.
Many who suggest a performance disadvantage infer that the code processed in a web application is some how different/inferior to code processed in the standard workflow. The base code type maybe different, and sure you’ll be needing the MSIL interpreter, but MS has shown in many cases you’ll actually see a performance increase in a .NET runtime over a native one.
It’s also wise to consider how IIS has to be a “jack of all trades” – allowing all sorts of configuration and overrides even on static files. Some of those are designed for performance increase (caching, compression) and – indeed – will be lost unless you reimplement them in your code, but many of them are for other purposes and may not ever be used. If you build for your needs (only) you can ignore those other pieces and should be realising some kind of performance advantage, even though there’s a potential ASP.NET disadvantage.
In my (non-.NET) MVC testing I’m seeing considerable (10x or more) performance benefits over webforms. Even if there was a small hit on the static content – that wouldn’t be a tough pill to swallow.
I’m not surprised the difference is almost negligible in your tests, but I’m happy to see it backed up.
NOTE: You can disable wildcard mapping from static directories (I keep all static files in /static/(pics|styles|…)) in IIS. Switch the folder to an application, remove the wildcard mapping, and switch it back from an application and – voilà – static files are handled by IIS without pestering your ASP.NET.