For your information, I send you a performance test result of Embedded
CaffeineMark on my mobile phones.
P905i + JVM(JBlend) is the fastest in three tests and the Dalvik VM
Interpreter on Java is very slow.

P905i (500MHz - UniPhier 4M + JBlend)
 Sieve: 1569
 Loop: 2421
 Logic: 2251
 String: 5109
 Float: 973
 Method: 830
 Overall: 1811
Spec sheet:
 http://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/P905i
 
http://panasonic.co.jp/corp/news/official.data/data.dir/jn080716-2/jn080716-2.html

Google Dev Phone 1 (528MHz - MSM7201A)
 Sieve: 464
 Loop: 551
 Logic: 394
 String: 491
 Float: 336
 Method: 397
 Overall: 433
Spec sheet:
 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google_phone

P905i (Java Dalvik VM on JBlend)
 Sieve: 6
 Loop: 3
 Logic: 26
 String: 85
 Float: 3
 Method: 6
 Overall: 9

---
Koji Hisano

On Apr 2, 9:42 pm, blindfold <[email protected]> wrote:
> Could be fun to see the performance of a CPU intensive Android
> function, after compilation to Dalvik bytecodes, and executed through
> your Java implementation of it, running on a Java ME mobile phone with
> JIT compiler for the Java VM, and compare that to the performance of
> running the same Dalvik bytecodes in the usual way with the Dalvik
> interpreter on the G1. In theory the JIT compiler might compensate for
> inefficiencies added by the Dalvik_bytecode-to-Java-to-JVM_bytecode
> translations, as long as those added inefficiencies do not cause a
> speed penalty larger than about a factor 5. :-)
>
> On Apr 1, 4:56 pm, hisano <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > I developed a Dalvik VM implementation on the Java 
> > platform.http://code.google.com/p/android-dalvik-vm-on-java/
>
> > ---
> > Koji Hisano
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Android Discuss" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected]
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/android-discuss?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to