Virtually all of the languages that aren't C, C++, and Objective C have the same (for all intents and purposes) memory safety property as Rust, so you can just check out the Programming Language Benchmark Game site to answer that question.
Nim doesn't without the Boehm GC (it segfaults if you send a pointer to another thread). D doesn't without the garbage collector. Go doesn't with GOMAXPROCS > 1. These are often languages that are brought up in discussions like this...
The problem is how much safe is safe in these discussions.
Rusts thread's safety is always brought up as part of the whole memory safety model and it is a very good goal to achieve.
However, if we were free of the typical C style memory corruption brought upon the world of computing, there would be a lot of more safer applications.
Even if those applications wouldn't be thread safe.
Right, well. I'll be very impressed if Rust manages to perform as slowly as the GC'd languages on real world, idiomatic code, with safeties on (not C# unsafe blocks, although the C# compiler and JIT require plenty of coercing even then). I tried with the CLR and found it very hard to get the things Rust/LLVM do. But I'm not that experienced so impressing me isn't too hard.
