I really like the simplicity of Go where the learning curve is very lean but accepting it as a system level programming would be a tough sell. I think it is more for Java/Python developers for building the enterprise softwares rather than using it for hardware/device-drivers/embedded programming, but you never know as Google is very successful selling Android on low powered smart devices.
I did some performance bench for C, C++, D and Go languages using the Fibonacci algorithm.
Results: (see updated results at the end)
For Fibonacci(25), C++ >= Go > C >= Lua-JIT > D > Lua-Terra > Java 1.6
For Fibonacci(50), Java > C > C++ > D-ldc > D-dmd > Go > Lua-Terra > Lua-JIT
Now surprisingly, Java out performed C/C++ for Fibonacci (50) which hurts my ego :) !!
| Language | % C++ Speed | Compiler/VM | Flags |
| FIBONACCI-25 | |||
| C++ | 100.0000 | Apple LLVM version 6.0 | -O3 |
| GO | 100.0000 | go version go1.3.3 darwin/amd64 | |
| C | 77.7778 | Apple LLVM version 6.0 | -O3 |
| LUA | 77.7778 | LuaJIT 2.0.3 | |
| D | 63.6364 | dmd | -m64 -O -inline -noboundscheck |
| D | 63.6364 | ldc | -m64 -O -inline |
| LUA | 43.7500 | Terra | |
| JAVA 1.6 | 43.4783 | 1.6.0_65-b14-462-11M4609) | |
| FIBONACCI-50 | |||
| JAVA 1.6 | 169.6710 | 1.6.0_65-b14-462-11M4609) | |
| C | 101.9846 | Apple LLVM version 6.0 | -O3 |
| C++ | 100.0000 | Apple LLVM version 6.0 | -O3 |
| D | 92.6376 | ldc | -m64 -O -inline |
| D | 81.7197 | dmd | -m64 -O -inline -noboundscheck |
| GO | 76.7760 | go version go1.3.3 darwin/amd64 | |
| LUA | 43.9684 | Terra | |
| LUA | 38.9649 | LuaJIT 2.0.3 |
For Source code and results: check out my github project.
Update:
It seems Clang on MacOS has some issue. I executed these on my Linux Virtual machine with gnu g++ and g++ is outperforming Java. My ego is intact :)
$g++ --version
g++ (GCC) 4.4.7 20120313 (Red Hat 4.4.7-4)
$g++ -O3 fib.cpp
time ./a.out 50
real 0m47.991s
user 0m47.981s
sys 0m0.000s
$java -version
java version "1.7.0_51"
$javac fib.java
$time java fib 50
real 0m51.897s
user 0m51.815s
sys 0m0.113s
Update:
It seems Clang on MacOS has some issue. I executed these on my Linux Virtual machine with gnu g++ and g++ is outperforming Java. My ego is intact :)
$g++ --version
g++ (GCC) 4.4.7 20120313 (Red Hat 4.4.7-4)
$g++ -O3 fib.cpp
time ./a.out 50
real 0m47.991s
user 0m47.981s
sys 0m0.000s
$java -version
java version "1.7.0_51"
$javac fib.java
$time java fib 50
real 0m51.897s
user 0m51.815s
sys 0m0.113s
You could try freepascal:
ReplyDeleteprogram Project1;
uses sysutils;
function fib(n:int64):int64 ;
begin
if n < 2 then fib:=n
else
fib:=(fib(n-1)+fib(n-2)) ;
end;
begin
writeln('Language Pascal:',(fib(strtoint(ParamStr(1)))));
end.
Why not using Java 8 or even Java 7? Java 6 reached end-of-life already.
ReplyDeleteI did run with Java 8. Below are results. Java 8 seem to be slower than Java 6 in my results.
ReplyDeletebash-3.2$ time /Library/Java/JavaVirtualMachines/jdk1.8.0.jdk/Contents/Home/bin/java -server fib 50
LANGUAGE Java 12586269025
real 0m53.373s
user 0m53.313s
sys 0m0.050s
Your benchmark is irrelevant.
ReplyDeleteAs is that comment.
ReplyDeletePlease do "some performance bench".
ReplyDeletePlease don't just do a 10 line Fib!
At least take tasks/programs from the benchmarks game and do repeated measurements with different workloads.
Better, improve on what the benchmarks game already does.
Cool, fancy writing a proper benchmark now?
ReplyDeleteMy results contradict yours.
ReplyDelete$ ./run.sh 50
Running java test
LANGUAGE JAVA: 12586269025
real 1m6.111s
user 1m5.957s
sys 0m0.048s
Running C++ test
LANGUAGE CPP:12586269025
real 0m59.461s
user 0m59.329s
sys 0m0.021s
Running C test
LANGUAGE C: 12586269025
real 0m59.342s
user 0m59.211s
sys 0m0.014s
$ gcc --version
gcc (Gentoo 4.7.3-r1 p1.4, pie-0.5.5) 4.7.3
Copyright (C) 2012 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
...
$ g++ --version
g++ (Gentoo 4.7.3-r1 p1.4, pie-0.5.5) 4.7.3
Copyright (C) 2012 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
...
$ java -version
java version "1.6.0_31"
OpenJDK Runtime Environment (IcedTea6 1.13.3) (Gentoo build 1.6.0_31-b31)
OpenJDK 64-Bit Server VM (build 23.25-b01, mixed mode)
It seems Clang on MacOS has some issue. I executed these on my Linux Virtual machine with gnu g++ and g++ is outperforming Java. My ego is intact :)
ReplyDelete$g++ --version
g++ (GCC) 4.4.7 20120313 (Red Hat 4.4.7-4)
$g++ -O3 fib.cpp
time ./a.out 50
real 0m47.991s
user 0m47.981s
sys 0m0.000s
$java -version
java version "1.7.0_51"
$javac fib.java
$time java fib 50
real 0m51.897s
user 0m51.815s
sys 0m0.113s
I will update the blog. Thanks.
Nice Article!_
ReplyDeleteNice article! You did work hard on your blog and I really appreciate your efforts. "Fibonacci" remind me of my Java Practical lab. Thanks for sharing this information and I think that Java is a way more good than other language as far as Performance and Security is concerned.
ReplyDelete