5 ms·
Would be a lot worse if performance was 1/10th. That’s what this benchmark shows. Essentially that it’s a lot better than people feared. The question for users
by hmottestad 6y ago
Would be a lot worse if performance was 1/10th. That’s what this benchmark shows. Essentially that it’s a lot better than people feared. The question for users like myself is, will things like IntelliJ still be decently fast? Still don’t know what kind of performance we will get from the JVM, but this shows some decent hope!
- DonaldPShimoda 6y agoI imagine it won't take long for something as widely used as the JVM to be compiled directly for the M1 instead of relying on Rosetta. :)
- hmottestad 6y agoIronically Microsoft just released a beta arm version of the JVM for Mac.
- WoodenChair 6y ago> Ironically Microsoft just released a beta arm version of the JVM for Mac. I wasn't aware of this. Can you provide a link?
- lolpython 6y agohttps://appleinsider.com/articles/20/09/22/microsoft-contributes-to-java-port-for-apple-silicon-macs https://appleinsider.com/articles/20/09/22/microsoft-contrib...
- saagarjha 6y agoThey have, unfortunately it's a bit crashy in what looks new non-platform specific code.
- rbanffy 6y agoHow is that result with Windows on ARM laptops?
- p1necone 6y agoDoes the M1 deviate enough from standard ARM64 to need a recompile?
- DonaldPShimoda 6y agoOh! Probably not; that's a good point. I don't know why it didn't occur to me that, of course, there's already an ARM-compatible JVM haha. Thanks!
- wincy 6y agoWow I wonder if these new Macs are going to be the new standard for iOS and Android development, since you can run your apps for both ecosystems natively.
- chrisseaton 6y agoThe JVM is a bit lacking on ARM64. I’m still seeing super-basic intrinsics being added to the compilers.
- saagarjha 6y agoYes, it would need to be build for Darwin.