3 ms·
On my computer, running the v8 benchmarks from the QuickJS source: -- QuickJS -- PROGRESS Richards RESULT Richards 445 PROGRESS DeltaBlue RESULT DeltaBlue 424
by ccheever 7y ago
On my computer, running the v8 benchmarks from the QuickJS source:
-- QuickJS --
PROGRESS Richards
RESULT Richards 445
PROGRESS DeltaBlue
RESULT DeltaBlue 424
PROGRESS Encrypt
PROGRESS Decrypt
RESULT Crypto 633
PROGRESS RayTrace
RESULT RayTrace 271
PROGRESS Earley
PROGRESS Boyer
RESULT EarleyBoyer 771
PROGRESS RegExp
RESULT RegExp 180
PROGRESS Splay
RESULT Splay 923
PROGRESS NavierStokes
RESULT NavierStokes 1979
SCORE 549
-- v8 (node) --
PROGRESS Richards
RESULT Richards 31083
PROGRESS DeltaBlue
RESULT DeltaBlue 51056
PROGRESS Encrypt
PROGRESS Decrypt
RESULT Crypto 36692
PROGRESS RayTrace
RESULT RayTrace 63343
PROGRESS Earley
PROGRESS Boyer
RESULT EarleyBoyer 50309
PROGRESS RegExp
RESULT RegExp 7910
PROGRESS Splay
RESULT Splay 22964
PROGRESS NavierStokes
RESULT NavierStokes 35214
SCORE 32307
- a_lieb 7y agoIf the scoring scheme works the same as the results he shows on the site (higher is better), then V8 is still far faster than QuickJS. Which wouldn't be all that surprising since the V8 folks have spent hundreds of thousands of man-hours on optimization and JIT magic, which is something that would be hard to duplicate, to say the least, in a ~1.5MB all-interpreted engine.