Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

You haven't done a "warmed up" version of benchmarks game — so you don't know how much or how little difference it would make for those tiny tiny programs.

https://benchmarksgame-team.pages.debian.net/benchmarksgame/...



For fast languages like C# and Java many benchmarks are finished in a few seconds. By their tests, the warmup adds ~.3 seconds to these tiny programs. That's a long time, 10-20% in some benchmarks!

In a couple benchmarks Java would probably be faster than C++ if the JVM was allowed to warm up


Updated for java 14.0.1: "Let's compare our fastest-of-6 no warmup measurements against the fastest-of-25 (or 55 or 175) with warmup JMH SampleTime p(0.0000) measurements"

https://benchmarksgame-team.pages.debian.net/benchmarksgame/...


> In a couple benchmarks Java would probably be faster…

Please be specific.

JMH timing for that spectral-norm program was 0.175s to 0.283s faster than the 4.29s elapsed time (16s cpu time).

That's not 10-20% it's 6.6%.

At best that might put the best Java spectral-norm program a little faster than the best Haskell program.

At best that might mean the best Java spectral-norm program took 2x (twice as long as) the best C++ program.

https://benchmarksgame-team.pages.debian.net/benchmarksgame/...

> … would probably be faster…

Please take those tiny tiny programs and JMH and make your own measurements — you might believe measurements you make yourself.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: