Something that you do a lot? Fine, write it in C/C++/Rust.
It's something that costs thousands/millions of dollars of compute? Ok, maybe it's worth it for you to spend a month on, put your robe on, and start chanting in latin.
In the end his test was comparing algorithms not compilers, but there is still something to that: we always make algorithmic compromises based on what is robust and what is brittle in our language of choice. The speed limits don't matter if only a madman would ever drive that fast.
They're so fast that, in the vast majority of cases, you don't even need optimization, you just need non-pessimization: https://youtu.be/pgoetgxecw8
But C and proper algorithms are still fast - Moore's law is going wider, yes, and single-threaded advancements aren't as impressive as they used to be, but solid C code and proper algorithms will still be faster than it was before!
What's not fast is when, instead of using a hashmap when you should have used a B-tree, you instead store half the data in a relational database from one microservice and the other half on the blockchain and query it using a zero-code platform provided by a third vendor.
This pales in comparison to the 4-6 orders of magnitude induced by thoughtless patterns, excessive abstraction, bloat, and user-hostile network round trips (this one is more like 10 orders of magnitude).
Write good clean code in a way that your compiler can easily reason about to insert suitable vector operations (a little easier in c++, rust, zig etc. than c) and it's perfect performance in my book even if it isn't saturating all the cores
Nowadays you need vector operations, you need to utilise GPU, you need to utilise various accelerators. For me it is black magic.