lspce is the lightest weight, least intrusive of all of them, even less than eglot if you ignore the setup costs. It gives you the least ability to inspect what's going on (I haven't checked the project for a couple of weeks, but when I first installed it it didn't even have the stderr output of the lsp that was running) but also feels the most transparent. Similar to lsp-bridge, you'll see a big benefit on large projects with the potential to block your UI.

lsp-bridge took the most work to set up, and is the least compatible with other common emacs tools, but that might be an advantage if you don't like company or xref. For extremely large projects with massive parsing overhead and the potential to block the UI, it's worth consideration.

lsp-mode is huge and complicated and does a lot of things and supports the most features. The release notes for lsp-mode 9.0 is longer than the whole feature list for lspce, I think.

eglot is built in and relatively simple to set up.

lsp-mode and eglot can both make up for the single-threaded nature of emacs by using lsp-booster. The json parsing in lsp-booster is better than what emacs 29 currently ships with (which will not necessarily be true with the upgrades to the json parser recently integrated), but still works async with emacs, so you'll never get the UI freezing while you wait for a completion. So in that regard, every lsp mode is on equal footing when it comes to bigger projects.