| |||||||||||||
Not too fast on amd64Not too fast on amd64Posted Feb 12, 2006 2:54 UTC (Sun) by man_ls (subscriber, #15091)In reply to: pre-compiled, fast code by man_ls Parent article: A look at GCJ 4.1 I did not keep the code around, so I rewrote it -- now with a much simpler structure -- and run it on my amd64 (some call it x86-64) running OpenSUSE 10.0. The machine had sporadic loads; but the results are quite similar over several rounds, and quite definite too.
I will post the code for review if anyone is interested. Sun's JDK 1.5 revision 6 for amd64, and gcj 4.0.2 20050901 with optimization results for null benchmark java gcj 0.007 1.638 results for add int benchmark java gcj 1.298 1.118 results for add long benchmark java gcj 0.751 1.810 results for add float benchmark java gcj 3.054 2.399 results for add double benchmark java gcj 3.103 2.223 results for method call benchmark java gcj 0.069 4.398 results for create object benchmark java gcj 27.28 148.356 results for append string benchmark, 1/5000 java gcj 0.069 0.183As you can see Sun has improved some things, notably method calls; while object creation has horrible performance in both Sun's java and GCJ. (The null benchmark was an artifact of the previous test setup, so you can ignore it; probably string concatenation too.) GCJ keeps a slight edge in some arithmetic operations. I'm looking forward to try out GCJ 4.1.
(Log in to post comments)
Benchmarks... Posted Feb 16, 2006 9:17 UTC (Thu) by mjw (subscriber, #16740) [Link] There were recently some benchmark tests done. Some claim gcj produced code is native-complied GCJ modules are almost always about 30-40% faster than other implementations (at least on real world code). Others have micro-benchmarks that show that there are cases where gcj isn't as fast at all. But in the end you have to be careful about what you benchmark, or GCJ will just optimize away all non-used code :)
|
|||||||||||||