[Mono-list] JVM performance: JVM as a basis for CLR

[Tom]

You provide no versions or compilation options for any
of the software you use, so it is pretty much
impossible to see what is happening.

So, it's impossible to draw any conclusions from your
measurements.

Tom.

--- Jens Bäckman <czw@home.se> wrote:
> Tom wrote:
> 
> >On the "fib" benchmark (mostly function calls), CLR
> >performs considerably worse than Sun's JVM.  On the
> >convolution benchmark, they perform about the same.
> >
> I tested this code on my own machine with IBM:s JVM,
> which has included 
> a very efficient JIT from version 1.1.6 first
> released for OS/2 Warp. 
> Compiler parameters were identical to yours, machine
> is a 1GHz Athlon 
> with Win2k.
> 
> ===== Log begin =====
> D:\Temp\Performancetest>java fibj
> starting
> fib(40)=165580141 took 2.584
> fib(40)=165580141 took 2.604
> 
> D:\Temp\Performancetest>fibs.exe
> starting
> fib(40)=165580141 took 00:00:03.3648384
> fib(40)=165580141 took 00:00:03.4048960
> 
> D:\Temp\Performancetest>java convj
> starting
> convolve=75.88665 took 1.542
> convolve=80.14561 took 1.452
> 
> D:\Temp\Performancetest>convs.exe
> starting
> convolve=75,88665 took 00:00:04.5365232
> convolve=80,14561 took 00:00:04.5365232
> ===== Log end =====
> 
> It is pretty clear to me which one of these VM:s
> perform the best...
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Mono-list maillist  -  Mono-list@ximian.com
> http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-list


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Make international calls for as low as $.04/minute with Yahoo! Messenger
http://phonecard.yahoo.com/