diff --git a/docs/Writing-the-Cyclone-Scheme-Compiler-Revision-1.md b/docs/Writing-the-Cyclone-Scheme-Compiler-Revision-1.md
index 1e08a77a..9daded53 100644
--- a/docs/Writing-the-Cyclone-Scheme-Compiler-Revision-1.md
+++ b/docs/Writing-the-Cyclone-Scheme-Compiler-Revision-1.md
@@ -36,6 +36,7 @@ Before we get started, I want to say **Thank You** to all of the contributors to
 - [Reader](#reader)
 - [Interpreter](#interpreter)
 - [Scheme Standards](#scheme-standards)
+- [Benchmarks](#benchmarks)
 - [Future](#future)
 - [Conclusion](#conclusion)
 - [Terms](#terms)
@@ -361,6 +362,28 @@ The interpreter's full implementation is available in the `(scheme eval)` librar
 
 Cyclone targets the [R<sup>7</sup>RS-small specification](https://github.com/justinethier/cyclone/raw/master/docs/r7rs.pdf). This spec is relatively new and provides incremental improvements from the popular [R<sup>5</sup>RS spec](http://www.schemers.org/Documents/Standards/R5RS/HTML/). Library support is the most important new feature but there are also exceptions, system interfaces, and a more consistent API.
 
+## Benchmarks
+
+[ecraven](https://github.com/ecraven) has put together an excellent set of [Scheme benchmarks](http://ecraven.github.io/r7rs-benchmarks/benchmark.html). These are the typical Scheme benchmarks that many implementations use but the remarkable thing about this suite is all of the major implementations are supported. This allows an apples-to-apples comparison of all of the major implementations.
+
+Over the past year Cyclone has matured to the point where almost all of the 56 benchmarks will run:
+
+<img src="images/benchmark-tests-finished.png">
+
+The remaining ones are:
+
+- `compiler` passes but returns the wrong result. This is going to be fun to track down since the program takes so long to compile...
+- `mbrotZ` fails because Cyclone does not support complex numbers.
+- `pi` does not work because Cyclone does not support bignums yet.
+
+Regarding performance, from Feeley's presentation:
+
+> Performance is not so bad with NO optimizations (about 6 times slower than Gambit-C with full optimization)
+
+But Cyclone has some optimizations now, doesn't it? The following is a chart of total runtime (in minutes) for the benchmarks that each Scheme passes successfully. Cyclone performs well against all of the interpreters but still has a long ways to go to match top-tier compilers. Then again, most of these compilers have been around for a decade or longer:
+
+<img src="images/benchmark-total-runtimes.png">
+
 ## Future
 
 Some goals for the future are:
@@ -376,18 +399,6 @@ In addition, developing [Husk Scheme](http://justinethier.github.io/husk-scheme)
 
 ## Conclusion
 
-TODO: this section is completely out of date, a better reference would be benchmark results from r7rs-benchmarks
-
-From Feeley's presentation:
-
-> Performance is not so bad with NO optimizations (about 6 times slower than Gambit-C with full optimization)
-
-Compared to a similar compiler (CHICKEN), Cyclone's performance is worse but also "not so bad":
-
-<img src="images/benchmark-tests-finished.png">
-
-<img src="images/benchmark-total-runtimes.png">
-
 Thanks for reading!
 
 Want to give Cyclone a try? Install a copy using [cyclone-bootstrap](https://github.com/justinethier/cyclone-bootstrap).