Skip to content
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • World
  • Users
  • Groups
Skins
  • Light
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (No Skin)
  • No Skin
Collapse
Code Project
  1. Home
  2. The Lounge
  3. performance puzzle

performance puzzle

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved The Lounge
questionc++performancecsharpcss
65 Posts 18 Posters 0 Views 1 Watching
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • S Super Lloyd

    I have a short program which check prime number. Run multiple time a single slow loop, to test performance. I have a C++, C# and F# version. (to be fair with C# the C++ version use fixed sized 32 bit integers, instead of native size int, but that doesn't seem to make a difference anyway) A few things puzzle me. 1. The c++ is definitely faster! my best C# tweak makes C++ 20% faster. That surprises me because C# is compiled too (at runtime, at the first run) and I am only looping over byte array and using int number, I am not doing interop, and even I use stackalloc and pointer in (unsafe) C# so there is no bound check. And the algorithm is so simple that it's hard to believe (but it must be true) that the C++ compiler optimize the generated code further than the JITted C# one... 2. creating an array with stackalloc result in faster loop (5%) than using fixed(&array[0]), in fact using fixed(&array[0]) has the same speed than using normal (safe and bound checked) array!! how come!?! 3. F# is 25% slower than C#. Well I guess I should not be too surprised and I guess that teach me the posts about amazing performance of F# have less to do with some "magic F# quality" and more to do with the heavy type inference / use of generic and "fast delegate" replacement, which is not really put to use in my sample. So, what is the question? err.. Well, any C# performance tip is welcome!

    A train station is where the train stops. A bus station is where the bus stops. On my desk, I have a work station.... _________________________________________________________ My programs never have bugs, they just develop random features.

    R Offline
    R Offline
    realJSOP
    wrote on last edited by
    #32

    Super Lloyd wrote:

    Well, any C# performance tip is welcome!

    Uncle John's Handy C# Performance Tip #237: Convert the code to unmanaged C++.

    .45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly
    -----
    "Why don't you tie a kerosene-soaked rag around your ankles so the ants won't climb up and eat your candy ass..." - Dale Earnhardt, 1997
    -----
    "The staggering layers of obscenity in your statement make it a work of art on so many levels." - J. Jystad, 2001

    C S 2 Replies Last reply
    0
    • A Aamir Butt

      Mechanical wrote:

      That is like looking for performance from Java: You won't get it.

      You are horribly wrong here. In some cases, C# can outperform C/C++ performance-wise. And that is because of the optimizations that can be made at intermediate-level i.e, IL or bytecode or whatever (which people like you think might be the reason for slowness). See here for a performance comparison between different languages[^] However, if you like to follow the sheep, go ahead.

      M Offline
      M Offline
      Mechanical
      wrote on last edited by
      #33

      Aamir Butt wrote:

      In some cases, C# can outperform C/C++

      How about ALL cases ? People who talk about C# (or any other retards' language) performance are talking about void while engaged with other C# (or any other retards' language) performance addicts in group masturbation. The link in your post points to another post by a C# guru (read as: VB guru). It says: "Remember : Engineers are expensive and servers are not!". Look at that! I mean just look at how pathetic that retard is.

      Aamir Butt wrote:

      However, if you like to follow the sheep, go ahead.

      I'll bet you are one of those that believe Java is the future of 3D.

      NULL

      A 1 Reply Last reply
      0
      • L Lost User

        Post it?

        S Offline
        S Offline
        Super Lloyd
        wrote on last edited by
        #34

        I already posted the source code: http://www.codeproject.com/Lounge.aspx?msg=3657380#xx3657380xx[^] As to the disassembly, err.... well, ok, but I have to cut the C++ version as it huge loads of stuff coming the #include(s), hopefully I'll cut it right ... disassembled JITted C#

        --- C:\Dev\Test\Performance\CSperf\Program.cs ----------------------------------
        if (args.Length != 1)
        00000000 push ebp
        00000001 mov ebp,esp
        00000003 push edi
        00000004 push esi
        00000005 sub esp,6Ch
        00000008 mov esi,ecx
        0000000a lea edi,[ebp-74h]
        0000000d mov ecx,1Bh
        00000012 xor eax,eax
        00000014 rep stos dword ptr es:[edi]
        00000016 mov ecx,esi
        00000018 mov dword ptr [ebp-0Ch],esp
        0000001b mov dword ptr [ebp-74h],2941BF9Bh
        00000022 mov dword ptr [ebp-60h],ecx
        00000025 cmp dword ptr ds:[001B7CB8h],0
        0000002c je 00000033
        0000002e call 62889E21
        00000033 xor edx,edx
        00000035 mov dword ptr [ebp-28h],edx
        00000038 xor edx,edx
        0000003a mov dword ptr [ebp-1Ch],edx
        0000003d xor edx,edx
        0000003f mov dword ptr [ebp-24h],edx
        00000042 xor edx,edx
        00000044 mov dword ptr [ebp-2Ch],edx
        00000047 xor edx,edx
        00000049 mov dword ptr [ebp-20h],edx
        0000004c xor edx,edx
        0000004e mov dword ptr [ebp-10h],edx
        00000051 mov eax,dword ptr [ebp-60h]
        00000054 cmp dword ptr [eax+4],1
        00000058 je 0000006B
        {
        Console.WriteLine("Usage:\tsieve [iterations]");
        0000005a mov ecx,dword ptr ds:[03832088h]
        00000060 call 62202DB4
        return;
        00000065 nop
        00000066 jmp 0000019A
        }

        		int NUM = int.Parse(args\[0\]);
        

        0000006b mov eax,dword ptr [ebp-60h]
        0000006e cmp dword ptr [eax+4],0
        00000072 ja 00000079
        00000074 call 6288BA5C
        00000079 mov ecx,dword ptr [eax+0Ch]
        0000007c call 6220EAC4
        00000081 mov dword ptr [ebp-38h],eax
        00000084 mov eax,dword ptr [ebp-38h]
        00000087 mov dword ptr [ebp-10h],eax
        var t0 = DateTime.Now;
        0000008a lea ecx,[ebp-40h]
        0000008d call 61D07768

        L D 2 Replies Last reply
        0
        • R realJSOP

          Super Lloyd wrote:

          Well, any C# performance tip is welcome!

          Uncle John's Handy C# Performance Tip #237: Convert the code to unmanaged C++.

          .45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly
          -----
          "Why don't you tie a kerosene-soaked rag around your ankles so the ants won't climb up and eat your candy ass..." - Dale Earnhardt, 1997
          -----
          "The staggering layers of obscenity in your statement make it a work of art on so many levels." - J. Jystad, 2001

          C Offline
          C Offline
          CPallini
          wrote on last edited by
          #35

          :-D 5.

          If the Lord God Almighty had consulted me before embarking upon the Creation, I would have recommended something simpler. -- Alfonso the Wise, 13th Century King of Castile.
          This is going on my arrogant assumptions. You may have a superb reason why I'm completely wrong. -- Iain Clarke
          [My articles]

          1 Reply Last reply
          0
          • S Super Lloyd

            I already posted the source code: http://www.codeproject.com/Lounge.aspx?msg=3657380#xx3657380xx[^] As to the disassembly, err.... well, ok, but I have to cut the C++ version as it huge loads of stuff coming the #include(s), hopefully I'll cut it right ... disassembled JITted C#

            --- C:\Dev\Test\Performance\CSperf\Program.cs ----------------------------------
            if (args.Length != 1)
            00000000 push ebp
            00000001 mov ebp,esp
            00000003 push edi
            00000004 push esi
            00000005 sub esp,6Ch
            00000008 mov esi,ecx
            0000000a lea edi,[ebp-74h]
            0000000d mov ecx,1Bh
            00000012 xor eax,eax
            00000014 rep stos dword ptr es:[edi]
            00000016 mov ecx,esi
            00000018 mov dword ptr [ebp-0Ch],esp
            0000001b mov dword ptr [ebp-74h],2941BF9Bh
            00000022 mov dword ptr [ebp-60h],ecx
            00000025 cmp dword ptr ds:[001B7CB8h],0
            0000002c je 00000033
            0000002e call 62889E21
            00000033 xor edx,edx
            00000035 mov dword ptr [ebp-28h],edx
            00000038 xor edx,edx
            0000003a mov dword ptr [ebp-1Ch],edx
            0000003d xor edx,edx
            0000003f mov dword ptr [ebp-24h],edx
            00000042 xor edx,edx
            00000044 mov dword ptr [ebp-2Ch],edx
            00000047 xor edx,edx
            00000049 mov dword ptr [ebp-20h],edx
            0000004c xor edx,edx
            0000004e mov dword ptr [ebp-10h],edx
            00000051 mov eax,dword ptr [ebp-60h]
            00000054 cmp dword ptr [eax+4],1
            00000058 je 0000006B
            {
            Console.WriteLine("Usage:\tsieve [iterations]");
            0000005a mov ecx,dword ptr ds:[03832088h]
            00000060 call 62202DB4
            return;
            00000065 nop
            00000066 jmp 0000019A
            }

            		int NUM = int.Parse(args\[0\]);
            

            0000006b mov eax,dword ptr [ebp-60h]
            0000006e cmp dword ptr [eax+4],0
            00000072 ja 00000079
            00000074 call 6288BA5C
            00000079 mov ecx,dword ptr [eax+0Ch]
            0000007c call 6220EAC4
            00000081 mov dword ptr [ebp-38h],eax
            00000084 mov eax,dword ptr [ebp-38h]
            00000087 mov dword ptr [ebp-10h],eax
            var t0 = DateTime.Now;
            0000008a lea ecx,[ebp-40h]
            0000008d call 61D07768

            L Offline
            L Offline
            Lost User
            wrote on last edited by
            #36

            Are you sure you got the optimized version of the C# code? I mean, yea it's supposed to be lame, but it's worse than I expected

            S 1 Reply Last reply
            0
            • R realJSOP

              Super Lloyd wrote:

              Well, any C# performance tip is welcome!

              Uncle John's Handy C# Performance Tip #237: Convert the code to unmanaged C++.

              .45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly
              -----
              "Why don't you tie a kerosene-soaked rag around your ankles so the ants won't climb up and eat your candy ass..." - Dale Earnhardt, 1997
              -----
              "The staggering layers of obscenity in your statement make it a work of art on so many levels." - J. Jystad, 2001

              S Offline
              S Offline
              Super Lloyd
              wrote on last edited by
              #37

              Well it's only tip #237, so I guess it's not the 1st thing I should rush to do! :)

              A train station is where the train stops. A bus station is where the bus stops. On my desk, I have a work station.... _________________________________________________________ My programs never have bugs, they just develop random features.

              P D 2 Replies Last reply
              0
              • M Mechanical

                Super Lloyd wrote:

                any C# performance tip is welcome!

                That is like looking for performance from Java: You won't get it. If you need (or want) performance, don't do retards' languages. I know this thread isn't meant to incite hatred against retards' languages.

                NULL

                D Offline
                D Offline
                Derek Viljoen
                wrote on last edited by
                #38

                Mechanical, I checked your profile. You've never authored an article, posted a snippet, entered a blog post, or otherwise shared any original thought, except to snipe at other people's comments on the message boards. In other words, you have yet to provide any empirical evidence for your worth to this site. No be a good boy and go away, please.

                M 1 Reply Last reply
                0
                • M Mechanical

                  My statement was made because I had to maintain some Native code I wrote some years ago. I realized how retarded I had become doing retards' languages.

                  peterchen wrote:

                  Are you open to evidence for my statement

                  I'm all ears (big, pointy ears).

                  NULL

                  P Offline
                  P Offline
                  peterchen
                  wrote on last edited by
                  #39

                  The Raymond Chen vs. Rico Mariani competition comes to mind. Clickety[^] Clickety-Click[^] The final result, at first look, supports your statement: The C++ version completed before the .NET application even did load. However, when you look at the history and details, you see that the road to the superfast C++ application was a rocky one, introducing subtle bugs and requiring a very experienced developer to counter the rather simple improvements to the C# solution.


                  With extensions like LINQ, Closures, Lambdas, Generics and some syntactic sugar, C# has become a rather complex and powerful language. It's complex and powerful in a different sense than C++, but still.

                  Agh! Reality! My Archnemesis![^]
                  | FoldWithUs! | sighist | WhoIncludes - Analyzing C++ include file hierarchy

                  modified on Friday, November 5, 2010 11:17 AM

                  1 Reply Last reply
                  0
                  • S Super Lloyd

                    Well it's only tip #237, so I guess it's not the 1st thing I should rush to do! :)

                    A train station is where the train stops. A bus station is where the bus stops. On my desk, I have a work station.... _________________________________________________________ My programs never have bugs, they just develop random features.

                    P Offline
                    P Offline
                    peterchen
                    wrote on last edited by
                    #40

                    Hey! Take stop reading my mind!

                    Agh! Reality! My Archnemesis![^]
                    | FoldWithUs! | sighist | WhoIncludes - Analyzing C++ include file hierarchy

                    1 Reply Last reply
                    0
                    • D DaveAuld

                      Nothing to do with the optimisation, but what about using the StopWatch class instead of datetime? Start the stop watch immediately before you enter the loop, and then stop it as soon as the loop exists.

                      Dave Find Me On: Web|Facebook|Twitter|LinkedIn CPRepWatcher now available as Packaged Chrome Extension, visit my articles for link.

                      L Offline
                      L Offline
                      Luc Pattyn
                      wrote on last edited by
                      #41

                      I agree. On my machine 10 iterations take 0.5 milliseconds, which DateTime.Now can't catch at all. :)

                      Luc Pattyn [Forum Guidelines] [Why QA sucks] [My Articles] Nil Volentibus Arduum

                      Please use <PRE> tags for code snippets, they preserve indentation, and improve readability.

                      1 Reply Last reply
                      0
                      • S Super Lloyd

                        I already posted the source code: http://www.codeproject.com/Lounge.aspx?msg=3657380#xx3657380xx[^] As to the disassembly, err.... well, ok, but I have to cut the C++ version as it huge loads of stuff coming the #include(s), hopefully I'll cut it right ... disassembled JITted C#

                        --- C:\Dev\Test\Performance\CSperf\Program.cs ----------------------------------
                        if (args.Length != 1)
                        00000000 push ebp
                        00000001 mov ebp,esp
                        00000003 push edi
                        00000004 push esi
                        00000005 sub esp,6Ch
                        00000008 mov esi,ecx
                        0000000a lea edi,[ebp-74h]
                        0000000d mov ecx,1Bh
                        00000012 xor eax,eax
                        00000014 rep stos dword ptr es:[edi]
                        00000016 mov ecx,esi
                        00000018 mov dword ptr [ebp-0Ch],esp
                        0000001b mov dword ptr [ebp-74h],2941BF9Bh
                        00000022 mov dword ptr [ebp-60h],ecx
                        00000025 cmp dword ptr ds:[001B7CB8h],0
                        0000002c je 00000033
                        0000002e call 62889E21
                        00000033 xor edx,edx
                        00000035 mov dword ptr [ebp-28h],edx
                        00000038 xor edx,edx
                        0000003a mov dword ptr [ebp-1Ch],edx
                        0000003d xor edx,edx
                        0000003f mov dword ptr [ebp-24h],edx
                        00000042 xor edx,edx
                        00000044 mov dword ptr [ebp-2Ch],edx
                        00000047 xor edx,edx
                        00000049 mov dword ptr [ebp-20h],edx
                        0000004c xor edx,edx
                        0000004e mov dword ptr [ebp-10h],edx
                        00000051 mov eax,dword ptr [ebp-60h]
                        00000054 cmp dword ptr [eax+4],1
                        00000058 je 0000006B
                        {
                        Console.WriteLine("Usage:\tsieve [iterations]");
                        0000005a mov ecx,dword ptr ds:[03832088h]
                        00000060 call 62202DB4
                        return;
                        00000065 nop
                        00000066 jmp 0000019A
                        }

                        		int NUM = int.Parse(args\[0\]);
                        

                        0000006b mov eax,dword ptr [ebp-60h]
                        0000006e cmp dword ptr [eax+4],0
                        00000072 ja 00000079
                        00000074 call 6288BA5C
                        00000079 mov ecx,dword ptr [eax+0Ch]
                        0000007c call 6220EAC4
                        00000081 mov dword ptr [ebp-38h],eax
                        00000084 mov eax,dword ptr [ebp-38h]
                        00000087 mov dword ptr [ebp-10h],eax
                        var t0 = DateTime.Now;
                        0000008a lea ecx,[ebp-40h]
                        0000008d call 61D07768

                        D Offline
                        D Offline
                        Daniel Grunwald
                        wrote on last edited by
                        #42

                        You need to be careful, the JIT will turn off optimizations when running inside the Visual Studio debugger (even in release builds!). To get the optimized JITted assembly code, you need to run your program from the command line, then attach the debugger to the running process, and click Break.

                        S 1 Reply Last reply
                        0
                        • S Super Lloyd

                          yes, do post back please! :P

                          A train station is where the train stops. A bus station is where the bus stops. On my desk, I have a work station.... _________________________________________________________ My programs never have bugs, they just develop random features.

                          S Offline
                          S Offline
                          Simon P Stevens
                          wrote on last edited by
                          #43

                          Well I've written a C# version that runs 15-20% faster that your original on my PC. It doesn't use unsafe either. But I don't think you'll like it.

                          private static void SafeTest_Improved1(string[] args)
                          {
                          int NUM = int.Parse(args[0]);
                          int end = 8193;
                          var primes = new byte[8193]{
                          1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,
                          1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,
                          1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,
                          1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,
                          1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,
                          1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,
                          1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,
                          1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,
                          1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,
                          1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,
                          1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,
                          1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,
                          1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,
                          1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,
                          1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,
                          1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,
                          1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,
                          1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,
                          1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,
                          1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,

                              1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1
                          
                          S 1 Reply Last reply
                          0
                          • D Daniel Grunwald

                            You need to be careful, the JIT will turn off optimizations when running inside the Visual Studio debugger (even in release builds!). To get the optimized JITted assembly code, you need to run your program from the command line, then attach the debugger to the running process, and click Break.

                            S Offline
                            S Offline
                            Super Lloyd
                            wrote on last edited by
                            #44

                            To test the speed I was running each program from the command line! ^_^

                            A train station is where the train stops. A bus station is where the bus stops. On my desk, I have a work station.... _________________________________________________________ My programs never have bugs, they just develop random features.

                            D 1 Reply Last reply
                            0
                            • S Super Lloyd

                              To test the speed I was running each program from the command line! ^_^

                              A train station is where the train stops. A bus station is where the bus stops. On my desk, I have a work station.... _________________________________________________________ My programs never have bugs, they just develop random features.

                              D Offline
                              D Offline
                              Daniel Grunwald
                              wrote on last edited by
                              #45

                              Yes but where did you get the disassembled C# code from? It looks like all locals are on the stack (never in registers), which the JIT normally does only when a debugger is attached.

                              S 1 Reply Last reply
                              0
                              • L Lost User

                                Are you sure you got the optimized version of the C# code? I mean, yea it's supposed to be lame, but it's worse than I expected

                                S Offline
                                S Offline
                                Super Lloyd
                                wrote on last edited by
                                #46

                                Yes it! :( Is it that bad? I'm not that conversant in ASM, so I couldn't tell... But in a way that's good news, they have room for improvement! Now, what are they waiting for!?! :rolleyes:

                                A train station is where the train stops. A bus station is where the bus stops. On my desk, I have a work station.... _________________________________________________________ My programs never have bugs, they just develop random features.

                                1 Reply Last reply
                                0
                                • D Daniel Grunwald

                                  Yes but where did you get the disassembled C# code from? It looks like all locals are on the stack (never in registers), which the JIT normally does only when a debugger is attached.

                                  S Offline
                                  S Offline
                                  Super Lloyd
                                  wrote on last edited by
                                  #47

                                  Ha, the disassembly I got it from VS! Not sure how to get it otherwise... Because on the disk it's not compiled, it's just MSIL, and even if I NGen I dunno where they store the compiled version! (BTW I just tried NGen and it was not faster!?!)

                                  A train station is where the train stops. A bus station is where the bus stops. On my desk, I have a work station.... _________________________________________________________ My programs never have bugs, they just develop random features.

                                  D 1 Reply Last reply
                                  0
                                  • M Mechanical

                                    Aamir Butt wrote:

                                    In some cases, C# can outperform C/C++

                                    How about ALL cases ? People who talk about C# (or any other retards' language) performance are talking about void while engaged with other C# (or any other retards' language) performance addicts in group masturbation. The link in your post points to another post by a C# guru (read as: VB guru). It says: "Remember : Engineers are expensive and servers are not!". Look at that! I mean just look at how pathetic that retard is.

                                    Aamir Butt wrote:

                                    However, if you like to follow the sheep, go ahead.

                                    I'll bet you are one of those that believe Java is the future of 3D.

                                    NULL

                                    A Offline
                                    A Offline
                                    Aamir Butt
                                    wrote on last edited by
                                    #48

                                    Mechanical wrote:

                                    I'll bet you are one of those that believe Java is the future of 3D.

                                    Java... Hahahaha... well I can't stop laughing. I haven't worked in Java since school. And I bet you are the one who writes all his linked list, hashtable, search and sorting algorithm from scratch because he believes that he can do better than those retards.

                                    Mechanical wrote:

                                    How about ALL cases ?

                                    Well, give me a case you are talking about but before that, give me the name of a NON-RETARD language as per your understanding.

                                    1 Reply Last reply
                                    0
                                    • D DaveAuld

                                      Nothing to do with the optimisation, but what about using the StopWatch class instead of datetime? Start the stop watch immediately before you enter the loop, and then stop it as soon as the loop exists.

                                      Dave Find Me On: Web|Facebook|Twitter|LinkedIn CPRepWatcher now available as Packaged Chrome Extension, visit my articles for link.

                                      S Offline
                                      S Offline
                                      Super Lloyd
                                      wrote on last edited by
                                      #49

                                      well, I run 10000 thousand iteration to compare them, so DateTime seems precise enough! :) I did use StopWatch in the past but, I dunno, was never converted to it, I guess I never needed to make measurement precise enough!

                                      A train station is where the train stops. A bus station is where the bus stops. On my desk, I have a work station.... _________________________________________________________ My programs never have bugs, they just develop random features.

                                      1 Reply Last reply
                                      0
                                      • S Super Lloyd

                                        Ha, the disassembly I got it from VS! Not sure how to get it otherwise... Because on the disk it's not compiled, it's just MSIL, and even if I NGen I dunno where they store the compiled version! (BTW I just tried NGen and it was not faster!?!)

                                        A train station is where the train stops. A bus station is where the bus stops. On my desk, I have a work station.... _________________________________________________________ My programs never have bugs, they just develop random features.

                                        D Offline
                                        D Offline
                                        Daniel Grunwald
                                        wrote on last edited by
                                        #50

                                        Super Lloyd wrote:

                                        Ha, the disassembly I got it from VS! Not sure how to get it otherwise...

                                        To get the optimized JITted assembly code, you need to run your program from the command line, then attach the debugger to the running process, and click Break. Because your Main function was already running before you attached the debugger, it will still have the real native code. .NET doesn't re-jit anything when attaching a debugger.

                                        S 1 Reply Last reply
                                        0
                                        • D Dan Neely

                                          Aamir Butt wrote:

                                          See here for a performance comparison between different languages[^]

                                          The comments on that post were staggeringly stupid. :((

                                          3x12=36 2x12=24 1x12=12 0x12=18

                                          A Offline
                                          A Offline
                                          Aamir Butt
                                          wrote on last edited by
                                          #51

                                          Dan Neely wrote:

                                          The comments on that post were staggeringly stupid.

                                          Yes, unfortunately. There are other performance comparisons as well but there is no point in posting the links here. As i said earlier, following the sheep..... :)

                                          1 Reply Last reply
                                          0
                                          Reply
                                          • Reply as topic
                                          Log in to reply
                                          • Oldest to Newest
                                          • Newest to Oldest
                                          • Most Votes


                                          • Login

                                          • Don't have an account? Register

                                          • Login or register to search.
                                          • First post
                                            Last post
                                          0
                                          • Categories
                                          • Recent
                                          • Tags
                                          • Popular
                                          • World
                                          • Users
                                          • Groups