.NET Performance
-
For those of you who are convinced that .NET and CLR will outperform C++ with a P3/P4 optimizing compiler please go into the kitchen now and fashion a helmet out of aluminium foil. The microsoft marketing / brainwashing / indoctrination signals being beamed from the satelltes are obviously too strong in your area. Will .NET reduce programmer effort / time to market / life cycle maintenence costs ? I do not know. What I do know is that if ms had developed all the appropriate libraries in open source c++ along with a new compiler. We would all be better of. But instead they are trying to move everyone into a proprietry managed environment where they can licence .net server products for big bucks just like sun and their J2EE / JMS vendors. just having a little rant
Joey Bloggs wrote: For those of you who are convinced that .NET and CLR will outperform C++ with a P3/P4 optimizing compiler I don't think it could ever do that but it could get in the 90% efficiency range.. You give up performance for added features. John
-
For those of you who are convinced that .NET and CLR will outperform C++ with a P3/P4 optimizing compiler please go into the kitchen now and fashion a helmet out of aluminium foil. The microsoft marketing / brainwashing / indoctrination signals being beamed from the satelltes are obviously too strong in your area. Will .NET reduce programmer effort / time to market / life cycle maintenence costs ? I do not know. What I do know is that if ms had developed all the appropriate libraries in open source c++ along with a new compiler. We would all be better of. But instead they are trying to move everyone into a proprietry managed environment where they can licence .net server products for big bucks just like sun and their J2EE / JMS vendors. just having a little rant
Joey Bloggs wrote: For those of you who are convinced that .NET and CLR will outperform C++ with a P3/P4 optimizing compiler... The actual overall performance will not be better, because of JIT compilation. However, in some math-intensive operations, .NET will out-perform native code, because of its optimizations for individual processors. I found this out in my search for details on ngen and how it affects performance.
"Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called sons of God." - Jesus
"You must be the change you wish to see in the world." - Mahatma Gandhi -
Joey Bloggs wrote: For those of you who are convinced that .NET and CLR will outperform C++ with a P3/P4 optimizing compiler Hi, I'm wondering where you actually heard that statement. I doubt any MS employees would have actually claimed that. What they DO seem to say is that there is ALOT of room for improvement on what is already a pretty performant platform. http://www.vertigosoftware.com/Quake2.htm[^] What's the difference between a C++ programmer and God? God knows he's not a C++ programmer : anon
I don't think ms has made that claim. There just seem to be a variety of folks around besotted with .NET (Way beyond its technological capabilities or likely real world performance). Who have also uncritically swallowed whole, microsoft claims on .net performance and their rationalization's on why they are going .net (for the good of mankind, obviously!)
-
For those of you who are convinced that .NET and CLR will outperform C++ with a P3/P4 optimizing compiler please go into the kitchen now and fashion a helmet out of aluminium foil. The microsoft marketing / brainwashing / indoctrination signals being beamed from the satelltes are obviously too strong in your area. Will .NET reduce programmer effort / time to market / life cycle maintenence costs ? I do not know. What I do know is that if ms had developed all the appropriate libraries in open source c++ along with a new compiler. We would all be better of. But instead they are trying to move everyone into a proprietry managed environment where they can licence .net server products for big bucks just like sun and their J2EE / JMS vendors. just having a little rant
Look, If you're not (and do not plan on) selling your services to a company that has bought into the MS line and will happily pay for all the new toys you desire, then i'd say it's rather unwise for you to be using MS tech. There's better, lower-cost stuff out there for many purposes. For those of us feeding on the MS teat, your rantings sound more like sour grapes. Either have fun doing what makes you the $$$, or find something else to do - such criticism is only useful if you follow it with: "and so this is what i'm going to do personally to correct this terrible problem."
Shog9
Let your mercy spill / On all these burning hearts in hell If it be your will / To make us well...
-
Joey Bloggs wrote: For those of you who are convinced that .NET and CLR will outperform C++ with a P3/P4 optimizing compiler... The actual overall performance will not be better, because of JIT compilation. However, in some math-intensive operations, .NET will out-perform native code, because of its optimizations for individual processors. I found this out in my search for details on ngen and how it affects performance.
"Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called sons of God." - Jesus
"You must be the change you wish to see in the world." - Mahatma Gandhijdunlap wrote: NET will out-perform native code, because of its optimizations. Do you know if .NET will make use of MMX, SIMD ...?? Also I was thinking one of the things that can really slow some algorithms written in C is float to int conversions. C states it must truncate, but the hardware rounds by default so the compiler has to remove the rounding effect and also add out of bounds checking. In a bilinear interpolation algorithm I used a couple of asm statements to do the conversion and it speeded up the algorithm by more than 10 times the original code speed... I really needed that because the images were taking several seconds to scale (they were over 30MB) and that was too long for the user to wait to view them... John
-
I don't think ms has made that claim. There just seem to be a variety of folks around besotted with .NET (Way beyond its technological capabilities or likely real world performance). Who have also uncritically swallowed whole, microsoft claims on .net performance and their rationalization's on why they are going .net (for the good of mankind, obviously!)
Joey Bloggs wrote: There just seem to be a variety of folks around besotted with .NET I have heard these stetements myself... John
-
Joey Bloggs wrote: For those of you who are convinced that .NET and CLR will outperform C++ with a P3/P4 optimizing compiler I don't think it could ever do that but it could get in the 90% efficiency range.. You give up performance for added features. John
Well as a windows developer for 13 years and a java developer for the last 3. I can almost guarentee that they will not be able to hit that sort of performance level. I doubt that they will get the CLR much faster than the JVM. And beyond that heap based instantiation of 'every' object and no placment new etc almost guarentees that you cannot write faster code.
-
jdunlap wrote: NET will out-perform native code, because of its optimizations. Do you know if .NET will make use of MMX, SIMD ...?? Also I was thinking one of the things that can really slow some algorithms written in C is float to int conversions. C states it must truncate, but the hardware rounds by default so the compiler has to remove the rounding effect and also add out of bounds checking. In a bilinear interpolation algorithm I used a couple of asm statements to do the conversion and it speeded up the algorithm by more than 10 times the original code speed... I really needed that because the images were taking several seconds to scale (they were over 30MB) and that was too long for the user to wait to view them... John
John M. Drescher wrote: Do you know if .NET will make use of MMX, SIMD ...?? I believe that's what they are talking about - taking advantage of the unique instructions on different processors when doing JIT Compilation, in order to achieve maximum speed. Native code can't do this very well without the binary being tied to the processor it's optimized for. But the JIT compiler finds out what processor the assembly is running on, and optimizes the machine code for that processor.
"Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called sons of God." - Jesus
"You must be the change you wish to see in the world." - Mahatma Gandhi -
Well as a windows developer for 13 years and a java developer for the last 3. I can almost guarentee that they will not be able to hit that sort of performance level. I doubt that they will get the CLR much faster than the JVM. And beyond that heap based instantiation of 'every' object and no placment new etc almost guarentees that you cannot write faster code.
Joey Bloggs wrote: I doubt that they will get the CLR much faster than the JVM. They already have. One of the ways they do it is to only JIT compile the parts of the assembly that you use, and not the parts you don't.
"Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called sons of God." - Jesus
"You must be the change you wish to see in the world." - Mahatma Gandhi -
Joey Bloggs wrote: I do not know That's obvious... Joey Bloggs wrote: But instead they are trying to move everyone into a proprietry managed environment where they can licence .net server products for big bucks Maybe that's the cause they call Microsoft a company??? I don't know, but if you bother selling something, than it maybe you're on the wrong site... just ranting a little back...
Olli "Ooooooh, they have the internet on computers now!"
Homer Simpson
:beer: + :java: = NULL :=> X|Yes but they are being very underhanded in the way they are trying to move everyone to .net and not stating their real intentions. When you hold a worldwide monopolistic power social responsibility and democratic public policy must come into play.
-
Joey Bloggs wrote: I doubt that they will get the CLR much faster than the JVM. They already have. One of the ways they do it is to only JIT compile the parts of the assembly that you use, and not the parts you don't.
"Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called sons of God." - Jesus
"You must be the change you wish to see in the world." - Mahatma GandhiGo to the kitchen right now. Hurry there is not much time left!
-
Go to the kitchen right now. Hurry there is not much time left!
Time left for what??? ;P ;P ;P So, instead of answering to what I said in the post, you gave a low blow. :rolleyes:
"Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called sons of God." - Jesus
"You must be the change you wish to see in the world." - Mahatma Gandhi -
Look, If you're not (and do not plan on) selling your services to a company that has bought into the MS line and will happily pay for all the new toys you desire, then i'd say it's rather unwise for you to be using MS tech. There's better, lower-cost stuff out there for many purposes. For those of us feeding on the MS teat, your rantings sound more like sour grapes. Either have fun doing what makes you the $$$, or find something else to do - such criticism is only useful if you follow it with: "and so this is what i'm going to do personally to correct this terrible problem."
Shog9
Let your mercy spill / On all these burning hearts in hell If it be your will / To make us well...
I am concerned at the long term costs to OUR societies. The lost opportunites the increased taxes and product costs that will flow from having a worldwide monopolistic power lead a large segment of the planets developers into such a proprietry solution. As to a response, I feel powerless against the beast. The open source communities are making small steps but I wonder if it will be enough.
-
I am concerned at the long term costs to OUR societies. The lost opportunites the increased taxes and product costs that will flow from having a worldwide monopolistic power lead a large segment of the planets developers into such a proprietry solution. As to a response, I feel powerless against the beast. The open source communities are making small steps but I wonder if it will be enough.
-
For those of you who are convinced that .NET and CLR will outperform C++ with a P3/P4 optimizing compiler please go into the kitchen now and fashion a helmet out of aluminium foil. The microsoft marketing / brainwashing / indoctrination signals being beamed from the satelltes are obviously too strong in your area. Will .NET reduce programmer effort / time to market / life cycle maintenence costs ? I do not know. What I do know is that if ms had developed all the appropriate libraries in open source c++ along with a new compiler. We would all be better of. But instead they are trying to move everyone into a proprietry managed environment where they can licence .net server products for big bucks just like sun and their J2EE / JMS vendors. just having a little rant
Joey Bloggs wrote: What I do know is that if ms had developed all the appropriate libraries in open source c++ along with a new compiler. We would all be better of. I don't understand, how this can improve performance? Philip Patrick Web-site: www.stpworks.com "Two beer or not two beer?" Shakesbeer
-
Joey Bloggs wrote: What I do know is that if ms had developed all the appropriate libraries in open source c++ along with a new compiler. We would all be better of. I don't understand, how this can improve performance? Philip Patrick Web-site: www.stpworks.com "Two beer or not two beer?" Shakesbeer
Open VC6 go to Project, Settings, C/C++, Code Generation and see what is the lastest processor that you can optimize for. Plus various other comments in this thread about heap based object instantiation etc. We won't even get into gc impacts on performance but do you really think letting the machine figure out what memory your using instead of telling it is going to improve performance.
-
But what about Mono and SharpDevelop? BTW, Do you use VC++?
"Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called sons of God." - Jesus
"You must be the change you wish to see in the world." - Mahatma GandhiI'm not so worried about the development environments. Its the .NET Server products that will be sold to every customer needing to run large .net solutions that are going to cost the big bucks. since v1.1 or 1.2 i can't quite remember
-
I'm not so worried about the development environments. Its the .NET Server products that will be sold to every customer needing to run large .net solutions that are going to cost the big bucks. since v1.1 or 1.2 i can't quite remember
-
But will they have to use those, or can alternative be made?
"Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called sons of God." - Jesus
"You must be the change you wish to see in the world." - Mahatma GandhiI really don't know. Is the CLR rated to run efficently on a multiprocessor 64bit XP platform for example and will it come with the OS or will you have to licence it seperately ?
-
Open VC6 go to Project, Settings, C/C++, Code Generation and see what is the lastest processor that you can optimize for. Plus various other comments in this thread about heap based object instantiation etc. We won't even get into gc impacts on performance but do you really think letting the machine figure out what memory your using instead of telling it is going to improve performance.
I actually was talking about "open source", that can improve performance. Philip Patrick Web-site: www.stpworks.com "Two beer or not two beer?" Shakesbeer