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. C# vs. C++ performance [modified] (Contest)

C# vs. C++ performance [modified] (Contest)

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved The Lounge
csharpc++htmlcss
60 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

    On another thread some posted this link: http://www.csharphelp.com/archives2/archive458.html[^] Now I was very suprised by this bad C# result, it's not at all what I experience! So I decided to test my self! I have .NET 2 and gcc 3.4.4 I compiled like this: CPP> gcc -O3 -o sieve2.exe sieve.cpp -lstdc++ C#> csc /o+ /nologo /out:sieve.exe Sieve.cs I got: C# 10000 Milliseconds = 1156 C++ 10000 Milliseconds = 1313 Haheum..... what else can I say? -- modified at 11:18 Tuesday 1st August, 2006 I propose a Contest. Post a small C++ performance test program here (less than 200 readable lines). I'll try to beat it with a C# version!

    E Offline
    E Offline
    El Corazon
    wrote on last edited by
    #10

    Super Lloyd wrote:

    C++ 10000 Milliseconds = 1313

    change to 562 Intel 8.0 and MSVC 6.0 You are running twice the time of "last generation's technology." :) shall I load up Intel 9.0 on another machine and make the difference greater? -- modified at 11:47 Tuesday 1st August, 2006

    _________________________ Asu no koto o ieba, tenjo de nezumi ga warau. Talk about things of tomorrow and the mice in the ceiling laugh. (Japanese Proverb)

    S S 3 Replies Last reply
    0
    • S Super Lloyd

      I tried cl /O2 /EHsc sieve.cpp It compiled without any message but crashed right away... Now, if C++ is so much more powerfull, why do I need an optimized compiler? :doh:

      E Offline
      E Offline
      El Corazon
      wrote on last edited by
      #11

      Super Lloyd wrote:

      why do I need an optimized compiler?

      you have one in C#, which is an optimizing compiler, just different concept. If you want to compare non-optimizing C++ to optimized C# and claim a definite win, you really need to rethink.

      _________________________ Asu no koto o ieba, tenjo de nezumi ga warau. Talk about things of tomorrow and the mice in the ceiling laugh. (Japanese Proverb)

      1 Reply Last reply
      0
      • S Super Lloyd

        Hey, GCC is not so bad! ;P I need some penguin right now! ;P

        E Offline
        E Offline
        El Corazon
        wrote on last edited by
        #12

        Super Lloyd wrote:

        Hey, GCC is not so bad!

        Nope, it's only slower than C#, that is a great selling point! :laugh:

        _________________________ Asu no koto o ieba, tenjo de nezumi ga warau. Talk about things of tomorrow and the mice in the ceiling laugh. (Japanese Proverb)

        J 1 Reply Last reply
        0
        • E El Corazon

          Super Lloyd wrote:

          C++ 10000 Milliseconds = 1313

          change to 562 Intel 8.0 and MSVC 6.0 You are running twice the time of "last generation's technology." :) shall I load up Intel 9.0 on another machine and make the difference greater? -- modified at 11:47 Tuesday 1st August, 2006

          _________________________ Asu no koto o ieba, tenjo de nezumi ga warau. Talk about things of tomorrow and the mice in the ceiling laugh. (Japanese Proverb)

          S Offline
          S Offline
          Super Lloyd
          wrote on last edited by
          #13

          Jeffry J. Brickley wrote:

          change to 562 Intel 8.0 and MSVC 6.0

          Wrong! You should test both program on your computer! because my computer is probably much slower than yours! otherwise you compare my C# version on my PC to you C++ version on your PC. well, all the C++ coder seems afraid to see the truth I could see... ;P

          E 1 Reply Last reply
          0
          • S Super Lloyd

            I tried to make a C++ project with VS... Obviously I'm not used to.. It doesn't recognize 'vector' :sigh: could anyone do the test? :sigh: (otherwise I could believe you are afraid to see C++ be beaten)

            E Offline
            E Offline
            El Corazon
            wrote on last edited by
            #14

            Super Lloyd wrote:

            (otherwise I could believe you are afraid to see C++ be beaten)

            I already did.... look down.

            _________________________ Asu no koto o ieba, tenjo de nezumi ga warau. Talk about things of tomorrow and the mice in the ceiling laugh. (Japanese Proverb)

            1 Reply Last reply
            0
            • E El Corazon

              Super Lloyd wrote:

              C++ 10000 Milliseconds = 1313

              change to 562 Intel 8.0 and MSVC 6.0 You are running twice the time of "last generation's technology." :) shall I load up Intel 9.0 on another machine and make the difference greater? -- modified at 11:47 Tuesday 1st August, 2006

              _________________________ Asu no koto o ieba, tenjo de nezumi ga warau. Talk about things of tomorrow and the mice in the ceiling laugh. (Japanese Proverb)

              S Offline
              S Offline
              Steve Maier
              wrote on last edited by
              #15

              Or he could have a slower PC than you.... ;)

              Steve Maier, MCSD MCAD MCTS

              1 Reply Last reply
              0
              • S Super Lloyd

                Jeffry J. Brickley wrote:

                change to 562 Intel 8.0 and MSVC 6.0

                Wrong! You should test both program on your computer! because my computer is probably much slower than yours! otherwise you compare my C# version on my PC to you C++ version on your PC. well, all the C++ coder seems afraid to see the truth I could see... ;P

                E Offline
                E Offline
                El Corazon
                wrote on last edited by
                #16

                Super Lloyd wrote:

                well, all the C++ coder seems afraid to see the truth I could see...

                Not all of us have C# on every machine.... but it was on a 3.0ghz Intel P4. what machine was yours on?

                _________________________ Asu no koto o ieba, tenjo de nezumi ga warau. Talk about things of tomorrow and the mice in the ceiling laugh. (Japanese Proverb)

                S 1 Reply Last reply
                0
                • E El Corazon

                  Super Lloyd wrote:

                  C++ 10000 Milliseconds = 1313

                  change to 562 Intel 8.0 and MSVC 6.0 You are running twice the time of "last generation's technology." :) shall I load up Intel 9.0 on another machine and make the difference greater? -- modified at 11:47 Tuesday 1st August, 2006

                  _________________________ Asu no koto o ieba, tenjo de nezumi ga warau. Talk about things of tomorrow and the mice in the ceiling laugh. (Japanese Proverb)

                  S Offline
                  S Offline
                  Super Lloyd
                  wrote on last edited by
                  #17

                  In case you don't know how to compile C# let's at least compare the computer's spec. I have and AMD Semprom 2800+ 1.61 GHz

                  1 Reply Last reply
                  0
                  • E El Corazon

                    Super Lloyd wrote:

                    well, all the C++ coder seems afraid to see the truth I could see...

                    Not all of us have C# on every machine.... but it was on a 3.0ghz Intel P4. what machine was yours on?

                    _________________________ Asu no koto o ieba, tenjo de nezumi ga warau. Talk about things of tomorrow and the mice in the ceiling laugh. (Japanese Proverb)

                    S Offline
                    S Offline
                    Super Lloyd
                    wrote on last edited by
                    #18

                    AMD Sempron 2800+ 1.61 GHz No wonder you are twice as fast!

                    E 2 Replies Last reply
                    0
                    • S Super Lloyd

                      On another thread some posted this link: http://www.csharphelp.com/archives2/archive458.html[^] Now I was very suprised by this bad C# result, it's not at all what I experience! So I decided to test my self! I have .NET 2 and gcc 3.4.4 I compiled like this: CPP> gcc -O3 -o sieve2.exe sieve.cpp -lstdc++ C#> csc /o+ /nologo /out:sieve.exe Sieve.cs I got: C# 10000 Milliseconds = 1156 C++ 10000 Milliseconds = 1313 Haheum..... what else can I say? -- modified at 11:18 Tuesday 1st August, 2006 I propose a Contest. Post a small C++ performance test program here (less than 200 readable lines). I'll try to beat it with a C# version!

                      C Offline
                      C Offline
                      Chris Losinger
                      wrote on last edited by
                      #19

                      on my machine C# (VS05) : 812 C++ (VC6) : 578 C++ (VS03) : 609 the C++ app won't run on VS05. out of range error in one of the vector iterator hits. default release build settings, for each -- modified at 12:04 Tuesday 1st August, 2006

                      Why donchoo take a peekchur mayn? OK, cleeeeek

                      S 2 Replies Last reply
                      0
                      • C Chris Losinger

                        on my machine C# (VS05) : 812 C++ (VC6) : 578 C++ (VS03) : 609 the C++ app won't run on VS05. out of range error in one of the vector iterator hits. default release build settings, for each -- modified at 12:04 Tuesday 1st August, 2006

                        Why donchoo take a peekchur mayn? OK, cleeeeek

                        S Offline
                        S Offline
                        Super Lloyd
                        wrote on last edited by
                        #20

                        Ha... good! okay.....

                        1 Reply Last reply
                        0
                        • S Super Lloyd

                          On another thread some posted this link: http://www.csharphelp.com/archives2/archive458.html[^] Now I was very suprised by this bad C# result, it's not at all what I experience! So I decided to test my self! I have .NET 2 and gcc 3.4.4 I compiled like this: CPP> gcc -O3 -o sieve2.exe sieve.cpp -lstdc++ C#> csc /o+ /nologo /out:sieve.exe Sieve.cs I got: C# 10000 Milliseconds = 1156 C++ 10000 Milliseconds = 1313 Haheum..... what else can I say? -- modified at 11:18 Tuesday 1st August, 2006 I propose a Contest. Post a small C++ performance test program here (less than 200 readable lines). I'll try to beat it with a C# version!

                          R Offline
                          R Offline
                          Rama Krishna Vavilala
                          wrote on last edited by
                          #21

                          Ahem.. Good old article[^]


                          My Blog

                          S 1 Reply Last reply
                          0
                          • C Chris Losinger

                            on my machine C# (VS05) : 812 C++ (VC6) : 578 C++ (VS03) : 609 the C++ app won't run on VS05. out of range error in one of the vector iterator hits. default release build settings, for each -- modified at 12:04 Tuesday 1st August, 2006

                            Why donchoo take a peekchur mayn? OK, cleeeeek

                            S Offline
                            S Offline
                            Super Lloyd
                            wrote on last edited by
                            #22

                            Is it .NET2?? .NET2 is much better than .NET1 !

                            C 1 Reply Last reply
                            0
                            • S Super Lloyd

                              Is it .NET2?? .NET2 is much better than .NET1 !

                              C Offline
                              C Offline
                              Chris Losinger
                              wrote on last edited by
                              #23

                              Super Lloyd wrote:

                              Is it .NET2??

                              yes

                              Why donchoo take a peekchur mayn? OK, cleeeeek

                              S 1 Reply Last reply
                              0
                              • R Rama Krishna Vavilala

                                Ahem.. Good old article[^]


                                My Blog

                                S Offline
                                S Offline
                                Super Lloyd
                                wrote on last edited by
                                #24

                                Good!

                                1 Reply Last reply
                                0
                                • C Chris Losinger

                                  Super Lloyd wrote:

                                  Is it .NET2??

                                  yes

                                  Why donchoo take a peekchur mayn? OK, cleeeeek

                                  S Offline
                                  S Offline
                                  Super Lloyd
                                  wrote on last edited by
                                  #25

                                  Alright, you won! ;)

                                  1 Reply Last reply
                                  0
                                  • S Super Lloyd

                                    AMD Sempron 2800+ 1.61 GHz No wonder you are twice as fast!

                                    E Offline
                                    E Offline
                                    El Corazon
                                    wrote on last edited by
                                    #26

                                    Super Lloyd wrote:

                                    No wonder you are twice as fast!

                                    grumble grumble growl... you made me pull out my 7.2 .net on the laptop, compile, move the application over and run... ;P 1000ms C# 562 Intel C++ Satisfied yet? yes, I moved to release on both, yes, using optimized on both rather than YOUR optimized on one and non on the other....

                                    _________________________ Asu no koto o ieba, tenjo de nezumi ga warau. Talk about things of tomorrow and the mice in the ceiling laugh. (Japanese Proverb)

                                    S 1 Reply Last reply
                                    0
                                    • E El Corazon

                                      Super Lloyd wrote:

                                      No wonder you are twice as fast!

                                      grumble grumble growl... you made me pull out my 7.2 .net on the laptop, compile, move the application over and run... ;P 1000ms C# 562 Intel C++ Satisfied yet? yes, I moved to release on both, yes, using optimized on both rather than YOUR optimized on one and non on the other....

                                      _________________________ Asu no koto o ieba, tenjo de nezumi ga warau. Talk about things of tomorrow and the mice in the ceiling laugh. (Japanese Proverb)

                                      S Offline
                                      S Offline
                                      Super Lloyd
                                      wrote on last edited by
                                      #27

                                      Hey, I did optimize both! didn't you see the -O3 ?! Well the result are... well.... I didn't know gcc was that bad!.... :omg: That make me rethink about life! :laugh:

                                      J 1 Reply Last reply
                                      0
                                      • S Super Lloyd

                                        On another thread some posted this link: http://www.csharphelp.com/archives2/archive458.html[^] Now I was very suprised by this bad C# result, it's not at all what I experience! So I decided to test my self! I have .NET 2 and gcc 3.4.4 I compiled like this: CPP> gcc -O3 -o sieve2.exe sieve.cpp -lstdc++ C#> csc /o+ /nologo /out:sieve.exe Sieve.cs I got: C# 10000 Milliseconds = 1156 C++ 10000 Milliseconds = 1313 Haheum..... what else can I say? -- modified at 11:18 Tuesday 1st August, 2006 I propose a Contest. Post a small C++ performance test program here (less than 200 readable lines). I'll try to beat it with a C# version!

                                        N Offline
                                        N Offline
                                        Nemanja Trifunovic
                                        wrote on last edited by
                                        #28

                                        Super Lloyd wrote:

                                        I propose a Contest. Post a small C++ performance test program here (less than 200 readable lines). I'll try to beat it with a C# version!

                                        From the top of my head:

                                        #include <iostream>
                                        using namespace std;

                                        int main()
                                        {
                                        double sum = 0.;
                                        for (unsigned i = 0; i < 0xffffffU; ++i) {
                                        char buffer[1024];
                                        for (int j = 0; j < 1024; ++j)
                                        sum += buffer[j];
                                        }
                                        cout << sum;
                                        }

                                        -- modified at 12:20 Tuesday 1st August, 2006

                                        Programming Blog utf8-cpp

                                        S 1 Reply Last reply
                                        0
                                        • S Super Lloyd

                                          AMD Sempron 2800+ 1.61 GHz No wonder you are twice as fast!

                                          E Offline
                                          E Offline
                                          El Corazon
                                          wrote on last edited by
                                          #29

                                          Super Lloyd wrote:

                                          AMD Sempron 2800+ 1.61 GHz No wonder you are twice as fast!

                                          I just looked at your specs... you realize that the 2800+ is the relative performance compared to an Intel right? My AMD is only 1.8ghz and runs faster than this one at work. I don't have any of my fast computers at the moment. :)

                                          _________________________ Asu no koto o ieba, tenjo de nezumi ga warau. Talk about things of tomorrow and the mice in the ceiling laugh. (Japanese Proverb)

                                          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