ARMv7 vs. x86-64: Pathfinding benchmark of C++, D, Go, Nim, Ocaml, and more

Re:ARMv7 vs. x86-64: Pathfinding benchmark of C++, D, Go, Ni... by atoponce on Saturday December 20, 2014 @06:32AM (#8776399)

The LuaJIT results don't surprise me. I've always been impressed with LuaJIT. The OpenJDK results also don't surprise me. If you work in a Java shop, you learn very quickly to throw out OpenJDK in favor of Sun/Oracle Java. OpenJDK is indeed a "steaming pile of crap".

However, I would have liked to see Julia and Javascript benchmarks in those results. I've heard great things about Julia, and knowing just how incredibly far we've brought the Javascript VMs over the past decade, it wouldn't surprise me to see Javascript fairly high on the list.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:ARMv7 vs. x86-64: Pathfinding benchmark of C++, D, Go, Ni... by logicchains on Saturday December 20, 2014 @06:56AM (#8776427)

>OpenJDK is indeed a "steaming pile of crap"

Just to clarify, it performed as well as the Oracle JVM on x86. Its poor performance on ARM is just due to its lack of JIT compilation.

>However, I would have liked to see Julia and Javascript benchmarks in those results.

I'm happy to include Javascript or Julia implementations if someone supplies them. I wasn't comfortable with Julia enough to write one myself.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:ARMv7 vs. x86-64: Pathfinding benchmark of C++, D, Go, Ni... by atoponce on Saturday December 20, 2014 @07:08AM (#8776446)

>> OpenJDK is indeed a "steaming pile of crap"

> Just to clarify, it performed as well as the Oracle JVM on x86. Its poor performance on ARM is just due to its lack of JIT compilation.

Understood. Admittedly, I'm a system administrator first, developer second. However, my experience has shown that Sun/Oracle JVM usually out performs OpenJDK. Even in development, on the Java teams I've had to support, OpenJDK is never preferred or wanted.

Further, RHEL ships the OpenJDK compiled with the GNU compiler for Java (GCJ), as well as GNU's classpath. From what I've seen supporting these Java teams, and not being a Java developer, it's unstable and slow.

So, in this specific instance, OpenJDK may have performed as well as the Sun/Oracle JVM on x86-64, but in the broader scope, it doesn't seem to hold up. Just my experiences though. Take it with a grain of salt.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:ARMv7 vs. x86-64: Pathfinding benchmark of C++, D, Go, Ni... by threeseed on Saturday December 20, 2014 @08:19AM (#8776565)

> OpenJDK is never preferred or wanted

I would argue it's actually risky.

Almost every Java developer uses the Oracle version because (a) it is what is recommended for OSX which is a popular development platform and (b) the bundled tooling is much better than OpenJDK. Hence you shouldn't mix/match JVMs just in case you hit implementation differences.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:ARMv7 vs. x86-64: Pathfinding benchmark of C++, D, Go, Ni... by imanaccount247 on Saturday December 20, 2014 @10:24AM (#8776817)

>However, my experience has shown that Sun/Oracle JVM usually out performs OpenJDK. Even in development

Your experience seems to be filtered through your misconceptions. It is the same code base.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:ARMv7 vs. x86-64: Pathfinding benchmark of C++, D, Go, Ni... by exabrial on Saturday December 20, 2014 @10:56AM (#8776902)

I wonder what magic sauce Oracle does then with their JDK? We can measure a very very very significant difference in performance both on x86 and ARM.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:ARMv7 vs. x86-64: Pathfinding benchmark of C++, D, Go, Ni... by atoponce on Saturday December 20, 2014 @11:41AM (#8777059)

It's not my misconception- it's that of the developers I support. I am told to install Oracle JVM, not OpenJDK. When I push back, I'm told they don't want it.

I am not a Java developer. I am a system administrator.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:ARMv7 vs. x86-64: Pathfinding benchmark of C++, D, Go, Ni... by th0br0 on Saturday December 20, 2014 @06:57AM (#8776428)

It seems to me though, that the Java numbers aren't representative. As far as I know, JVM benchmarks should allow HotSpot etc to optimise the functions by calling them ~1k times before the actual benchmark happens. That doesn't seem to be the case in the code.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:ARMv7 vs. x86-64: Pathfinding benchmark of C++, D, Go, Ni... by logicchains on Saturday December 20, 2014 @07:07AM (#8776445)

The same function is being called over and over millions of times, so hopefully that should give HotSpot a chance to kick in. I didn't want to add artificial warm up as I don't think that's representative of real code.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:ARMv7 vs. x86-64: Pathfinding benchmark of C++, D, Go, Ni... by igouy on Sunday December 21, 2014 @02:20AM (#8779200)

Check times with JMH

http://openjdk.java.net/projects/code-tools/jmh/

Also -XX:-PrintCompilation -XX:-PrintGC

https://wikis.oracle.com/display/HotSpotInternals/MicroBench...

[ Parent | on HN ]