According to below chart, choosing C++ just for the sake of performance doesn't seem very feasable to me. Remember : Engineers are expensive and servers are not!
Saturday, February 07, 2009
C# versus C++ versus Java performance comparison
The performance comparison of C#, Java and C++ was always a controversial subject. Many people who are unfamiliar with JIT'ed environments claimed anything runs on JIT is too slow compared to C++. On the other hand people who actually use Java and C# usually claimed the otherwise that performance impact is negligable. Here's a nice chart I've found that a friend in freenode IRC server pointed me. These benchmarks are done by Matt R Warren (aka Moridin8 in irc.freenode.net) and his original site is http://www.csharp-architect.com
According to below chart, choosing C++ just for the sake of performance doesn't seem very feasable to me. Remember : Engineers are expensive and servers are not!
According to below chart, choosing C++ just for the sake of performance doesn't seem very feasable to me. Remember : Engineers are expensive and servers are not!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
28 comments:
Please run PHP and Ruby on Linux. PHP is not optimized for Windows. Therefore PHP is deadly slow on this platform
Please make sure you run with server jvm on windows - java is not using it by default (as opposed to linux).
If possible, make the benchmark bit longer - 3-4 seconds hardly gives any chance to dynamic optimization and penalizes longer startup times. One minute for java should be more than enough to offset those factors.
Engineers are expensive and servers are not!
Servers may be cheap, but the real cost of the energy to run those servers is increasingly more expensive. The fewer servers required to ship bits, the better.
if.. if.. if...
Java is the best language... have the perfect api with all resources needed to development.
Sorry PHP, sorry ruby, sorry microsoft.. But java is the best!!!
Great chart and graph.
It would be very interested to compare the performance using multicore programming or concurrent or threaded programming.
For example, we had an application written in C# which had an horrible performance. However, we made some exercises found in the excellent book "C# 2008 and 2005 threaded programming", by Packt Publishing (http://www.packtpub.com/beginners-guide-for-C-sharp-2008-and-2005-threaded-programming/book), and we could multiply performance by more than 3,5 in a quad-core CPU.
Therefore, I think it would be great to see a performance comparison taking into account modern multicore computers.
Besides, the Garbage collector would enter in action. And, the results should be very interesting for the developers interested in the best performance.
I work with both Java and C#.
if you say about a garbage collectors. On this aspect, java and c# its equals... because the language patterns and design its very equals..
Uses of garbage collector set the java on the top of ranking... Yes.. show the graphic using this method.
And C#? Yes.. C# to.. Sun creates.. Microsoft Copies..
Good for .NET programmers...
Im to develop in Java and C# to...
But.. the .NET framework not help the C# language in performance and in a best programmer methods.
Thanks
What about memory usage ?
Hi,
I would actually like to see the code. I beleave, that your results are correct for typicaly written programms. But in C++ you can optimize and optimize and optimize until the last register is your best friend and the pipelines are your lovers.
I guess the numbers come from The Computer Language Benchmark Game (http://shootout.alioth.debian.org/) and/or the windows port at http://dada.perl.it/shootout/
Can you please detail the compiler settings used for each compiler tool? Thanks.
A lot of fucking spam over here... Ruby 1.8 is old and slow. It should use Ruby 1.9
What configuration of server?
PHP correct working on Unix optimizet server.
"But in C++ you can optimize and optimize and optimize until the last register is your best friend and the pipelines are your lovers."
Yes, and you have to pay the development costs. That way we can say that hand written assembly code is the best... who the hell will pay out the 100x development time?
All those things that previous commentators have said are missing from this "performance comparison"
- run PHP and Ruby on Linux
- make the benchmark bit longer
- multicore
- memory usage
- the code
- the compiler settings
- Ruby 1.9
...
are shown on the website these programs were taken from
The Computer Language Benchmarks Game
When I bought my computer and I didn´t know how to use java graphics, so I decided looking for information in a webside and I found an useful information that helped me a lot.. Now I am interested in to do the best investment and I found a webside very useful and interesting called costa rica investment opportunities , I think it´s a very wonderful site.
Interesting post. Too bad it's completely inaccurate.
1) The claim in this article finds no ground in reality - the performance difference is noticeable by end users.
2) I find these numbers hard to believe. Really hard to believe - I mean, they show C# being faster than C++.
It doesn't matter how fast C# is, C++ will always be faster, because by definition it does less.
"Engineers are expensive and servers are not!"
Look around the world there are more Engineers than servers.
Thanks for the information
http://extreme-java.blogspot.com
This is a nice article..
Its very easy to understand ..
And this article is using to learn something about it..
c#, dot.net, php tutorial
Thanks a lot..!
Would you please do a better graph? Use a bar chart or something.
"The claim in this article finds no ground in reality - the performance difference is noticeable by end users."
Facepalm... This is because C# is easier to learn => more unskilled novices make more software.
C++ is more difficult => there is less novices, more pros => more fast and robust software.
C# apps being generally slower doesn't mean c# is worse than c++ at all. It doesn't have to do anyhing with its performance. In good hands, any tool is nearly perfect.
>It doesn't matter how fast C# is, C++ will always be faster, because by definition it does less.
Seems you have little experience in both systems... C# _doesn't_ actually do more. .NET environment is basically the same C++ compiler except it does it on-demand. Its code output can be (and often is) 100% identical to that of C++. The only thing C# does "more", is forced garbage collection. You're right, if you're writing a hello world program. If there is a garbage collection while the program is printing "Hello, World!" then that might be problem.
But if you're writing a complex application, C#'s garbage collection is a plus. Why? Because C++'s ugly RIA does more. Imagine there a lot of functions, and each time it acquires, initializes and destructs. There is also reference counting out there -- and it does a lot more than C# as well (right to memory each time).
General memory allocation system does a lot more in C++ than in C# (it has bump pointer allocation).
C# may be still a little bit slower (thoough already comparable) just 1) it's not so mature as C++, still developing 2) Microsoft loves to do things gradually, to buy as many new versions as possible.
Good article. This is a good article explaining which is better for beginners. http://mytechrant.com/?p=6
This word makes the whole post classic "Engineers are expensive and servers are not", quite true and that's why Java rules because of ease of development and availability of expertise.
Java Devs say C# is inferior , whereas .Net developers bite th'm the other way round.........
I would love to listen to the views of those who are .Net(C#) cum Java developer..... :p
The server may be cheap, but the real cost energy to run the server is more and more expensive. The fewer the server may need to position the better.
If possible, make the benchmark bit longer - 3-4 seconds hardly gives any chance to dynamic optimization and penalizes longer startup times. One minute for java should be more than enough to offset those factors.
Post a Comment