One way to look at it is that if some company is continuing to pay you to work for them, they must have determined that it was worth it to them. If management is putting pressure on you to produce more, it's because they want, say, a 3x return on their investment instead of a 2x return.
By accepting a job from them, you're obligated to work diligently at a sustainable pace. You aren't obligated to worry about whether you're more productive than your peers.
I posted a link to Beppo the road sweeper's monologue from Momo by Michael Ende in a thread on a time management story a few days ago, but I'll link to it again since it seems relevant: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Q_JYYcBP2Q#t=15m05s
If management has capital to spend, they might be spending it on new hires to see which ones work out, and firing low performers such as yourself. The majority of states are at-will states so you could easily get laid off.
That is something to consider. There is a difference though between working harder because you're afraid that you'll be replaced by someone faster and cheaper and working harder because you're motivated by feelings of guilt and shame. I don't think either one is particularly healthy, but in the former case you can at least make a rational decision whether the job is worth enough to you to risk burning yourself out.
It's also worth considering that not all developers are easy to replace, for various reasons. A lot of big companies aren't in a position to be choosy as long as their employees are reasonably competent and can do the work.
By accepting a job from them, you're obligated to work diligently at a sustainable pace. You aren't obligated to worry about whether you're more productive than your peers.
I posted a link to Beppo the road sweeper's monologue from Momo by Michael Ende in a thread on a time management story a few days ago, but I'll link to it again since it seems relevant: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Q_JYYcBP2Q#t=15m05s