3 ms·
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
by eggsnbacon1 6y ago
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
- igouy 6y ago> 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/q6600/performance/spectralnorm.html 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.
- igouy 6y agoUpdated 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/sometimes-people-just-make-up-stuff.html#jvm-startup-time https://benchmarksgame-team.pages.debian.net/benchmarksgame/...