Re: [Mono-list] offtopic, but cool
It just occurred to me, but this test is really unfair to C++. std::list is a linked-list, requiring a heap allocation for each node in the list. ArrayList and ListT both use arrays for their internal storage, and thus would require far fewer allocations. I would suggest re-testing the C++ program, but use std::vector instead of std::list. std::vector is the array-based implementation, which is supposed to provide (amortized) O(1) append time. (Of course, std::list also provides O(1) append and insert time, but the heap allocation per node requirement is a killer, as opposed to the probable log(n) heap allocations an array would require, assuming you don't pre-allocate the array.) Which reminds me: running the test with the List/vector pre-allocated would be interesting, as it would help to remove the C++ heap allocator and the GC from the performance equation, allowing us to see a better comparison between the two models. - Jon On Wed, 2004-05-12 at 07:56, Cory Nelson wrote: Just got done installing the VS.NET 2005 preview and did a small test. I compared an ArrayList of Rectangles to a ListRectangle, and timed inserting 1mil rects into each. I also wrote an equivalent c++ app. Got some interesting results: ArrayList: 265ms ListRectangle: 62ms listrect: 141ms So it seems with generics .NET is finally faster than c++ (at least, in this case). ___ Mono-list maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-list
Re: [Mono-list] offtopic, but cool
Good point. I re-coded with that in mind, and it seems as long as you
preallocate the c++ vector, it wins:
vectorrect: 109ms
vectorrect(100): 15ms
ListRectangle: 78.13ms
ListRectangle(100): 46.88ms
Perhaps std::vectorT is allocating smaller chunks than ListT?
On Thu, 13 May 2004 06:54:41 -0400, Jonathan Pryor [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It just occurred to me, but this test is really unfair to C++.
std::list is a linked-list, requiring a heap allocation for each node in
the list. ArrayList and ListT both use arrays for their internal
storage, and thus would require far fewer allocations.
I would suggest re-testing the C++ program, but use std::vector instead
of std::list. std::vector is the array-based implementation, which is
supposed to provide (amortized) O(1) append time. (Of course, std::list
also provides O(1) append and insert time, but the heap allocation per
node requirement is a killer, as opposed to the probable log(n) heap
allocations an array would require, assuming you don't pre-allocate the
array.)
Which reminds me: running the test with the List/vector pre-allocated
would be interesting, as it would help to remove the C++ heap allocator
and the GC from the performance equation, allowing us to see a better
comparison between the two models.
- Jon
On Wed, 2004-05-12 at 07:56, Cory Nelson wrote:
Just got done installing the VS.NET 2005 preview and did a small test.
I compared an ArrayList of Rectangles to a ListRectangle, and timed
inserting 1mil rects into each. I also wrote an equivalent c++ app.
Got some interesting results:
ArrayList: 265ms
ListRectangle: 62ms
listrect: 141ms
So it seems with generics .NET is finally faster than c++ (at least,
in this case).
#region Using directives
using System;
using System.Collections;
using System.Collections.Generic;
using System.Drawing;
#endregion
namespace SpeedTestNet {
class Program {
static void testlist() {
GC.Collect();
GC.WaitForPendingFinalizers();
ListRectangle rl=new ListRectangle();
DateTime start, end;
start=DateTime.Now;
for(int i=0; i100; i++)
rl.Add(new Rectangle(i, i, i, i));
end=DateTime.Now;
Console.WriteLine(ListRectangle: {0:F2}ms,
(end-start).TotalMilliseconds);
rl.Clear();
}
static void testlistpa() {
GC.Collect();
GC.WaitForPendingFinalizers();
ListRectangle rl=new ListRectangle(100);
DateTime start, end;
start=DateTime.Now;
for(int i=0; i100; i++)
rl.Add(new Rectangle(i, i, i, i));
end=DateTime.Now;
Console.WriteLine(ListRectangle(100): {0:F2}ms,
(end-start).TotalMilliseconds);
rl.Clear();
}
static void Main(string[] args) {
testlist();
testlistpa();
}
}
}
#include vector
#include iostream
#include ctime
using namespace std;
struct rect {
int x;
int y;
int width;
int height;
};
static void testvector(void) {
vectorrect rv;
clock_t start, end;
start=clock();
for(int i=0; i100; i++) {
rect r={i, i, i, i};
rv.push_back(r);
}
end=clock();
cout vectorrect:
(((float)(end-start))/((float)CLOCKS_PER_SEC)*1000.0f) ms endl;
}
static void testvectorpa(void) {
vectorrect rv(100);
clock_t start, end;
start=clock();
for(int i=0; i100; i++) {
rect r={i, i, i, i};
rv[i]=r;
}
end=clock();
cout vectorrect(100):
(((float)(end-start))/((float)CLOCKS_PER_SEC)*1000.0f) ms endl;
}
int main(void) {
testvector();
testvectorpa();
return 0;
}
[Mono-list] offtopic, but cool
Just got done installing the VS.NET 2005 preview and did a small test.
I compared an ArrayList of Rectangles to a ListRectangle, and timed
inserting 1mil rects into each. I also wrote an equivalent c++ app.
Got some interesting results:
ArrayList: 265ms
ListRectangle: 62ms
listrect: 141ms
So it seems with generics .NET is finally faster than c++ (at least,
in this case).
#region Using directives
using System;
using System.Collections;
using System.Collections.Generic;
using System.Drawing;
#endregion
namespace SpeedTest {
class Program {
static void Main(string[] args) {
ArrayList al = new ArrayList();
ListRectangle rl = new ListRectangle();
DateTime start, end;
GC.Collect();
GC.WaitForPendingFinalizers();
start = DateTime.Now;
for (int i = 0; i 100; i++)
al.Add(new Rectangle(i, i, i, i));
end = DateTime.Now;
Console.WriteLine(Arraylist: {0:F3}ms,
(end-start).TotalMilliseconds);
GC.Collect();
GC.WaitForPendingFinalizers();
start = DateTime.Now;
for (int i = 0; i 100; i++)
rl.Add(new Rectangle(i, i, i, i));
end = DateTime.Now;
Console.WriteLine(ListRectangle: {0:F3}ms, (end -
start).TotalMilliseconds);
}
}
}
#include list
#include iostream
#include ctime
using namespace std;
struct rect {
int x;
int y;
int width;
int height;
};
int main(void) {
listrect rl;
clock_t start=clock();
for(int i=0; i100; i++) {
rect r={i, i, i, i};
rl.push_back(r);
}
clock_t end=clock();
cout listrect:
(((float)(end-start))/((float)CLOCKS_PER_SEC)*1000.0f) ms endl;
return 0;
}
Re: [Mono-list] offtopic, but cool
Hi Cory,
In the C++ sample, you are passing the rect by value, so you are saving
a copy in the list. In C# a reference to the object is used, so there
is no copy-construction overhead.
You can change the listrect to a listrect*, but this
way you have to manage the memory by yourlself.
[]
Mello
Cory Nelson wrote:
Just got done installing the VS.NET 2005 preview and did a small test.
I compared an ArrayList of Rectangles to a ListRectangle, and timed
inserting 1mil rects into each. I also wrote an equivalent c++ app.
Got some interesting results:
ArrayList: 265ms
ListRectangle: 62ms
listrect: 141ms
So it seems with generics .NET is finally faster than c++ (at least,
in this case).
Esta mensagem foi verificada pelo E-mail Protegido Terra.
Scan engine: VirusScan / Atualizado em 10/05/2004 / Verso: 1.5.2
Proteja o seu e-mail Terra: http://www.emailprotegido.terra.com.br/
#region Using directives
using System;
using System.Collections;
using System.Collections.Generic;
using System.Drawing;
#endregion
namespace SpeedTest {
class Program {
static void Main(string[] args) {
ArrayList al = new ArrayList();
ListRectangle rl = new ListRectangle();
DateTime start, end;
GC.Collect();
GC.WaitForPendingFinalizers();
start = DateTime.Now;
for (int i = 0; i 100; i++)
al.Add(new Rectangle(i, i, i, i));
end = DateTime.Now;
Console.WriteLine("Arraylist: {0:F3}ms", (end-start).TotalMilliseconds);
GC.Collect();
GC.WaitForPendingFinalizers();
start = DateTime.Now;
for (int i = 0; i 100; i++)
rl.Add(new Rectangle(i, i, i, i));
end = DateTime.Now;
Console.WriteLine("ListRectangle: {0:F3}ms", (end - start).TotalMilliseconds);
}
}
}
#include list
#include iostream
#include ctime
using namespace std;
struct rect {
int x;
int y;
int width;
int height;
};
int main(void) {
listrect rl;
clock_t start=clock();
for(int i=0; i100; i++) {
rect r={i, i, i, i};
rl.push_back(r);
}
clock_t end=clock();
cout "listrect: " (((float)(end-start))/((float)CLOCKS_PER_SEC)*1000.0f) "ms" endl;
return 0;
}
Re: [Mono-list] offtopic, but cool
Yea I thought of that, but doing so made it take twice the time:
listrect* rl;
for(int i=0; i100; i++) {
rect *r=new rect;
r-x=i;
r-y=i;
r-width=i;
r-height=i;
rl.push_back(r);
}
- Original Message -
From: Cesar Mello [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Wed, 12 May 2004 09:41:24 -0300
Subject: Re: [Mono-list] offtopic, but cool
To: Cory Nelson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: mono-list [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hi Cory,
In the C++ sample, you are passing the rect by value, so you are
saving a copy in the list. In C# a reference to the object is used, so
there is no copy-construction overhead.
You can change the listrect to a listrect*, but this way you have
to manage the memory by yourlself.
[]
Mello
Cory Nelson wrote:
Just got done installing the VS.NET 2005 preview and did a small test.
I compared an ArrayList of Rectangles to a ListRectangle, and timed
inserting 1mil rects into each. I also wrote an equivalent c++ app.
Got some interesting results:
ArrayList: 265ms
ListRectangle: 62ms
listrect: 141ms
So it seems with generics .NET is finally faster than c++ (at least,
in this case).
Esta mensagem foi verificada pelo E-mail Protegido Terra.
Scan engine: VirusScan / Atualizado em 10/05/2004 / Versão: 1.5.2
Proteja o seu e-mail Terra: http://www.emailprotegido.terra.com.br/
___
Mono-list maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-list
RE: [Mono-list] offtopic, but cool
Cory, I'm curious, did you compare the IL to see whats different?
-Dan
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lluis Sanchez
Sent: Wednesday, May 12, 2004 9:17 AM
To: Cesar Mello
Cc: Cory Nelson; mono-list
Subject: Re: [Mono-list] offtopic, but cool
System.Drawing.Rectangle is a struct, so it is copied by value, not by
reference.
On dc, 2004-05-12 at 14:41, Cesar Mello wrote:
Hi Cory,
In the C++ sample, you are passing the rect by value, so you are
saving a copy in the list. In C# a reference to the object is used, so
there is no copy-construction overhead.
You can change the listrect to a listrect*, but this way you have
to manage the memory by yourlself.
[]
Mello
Cory Nelson wrote:
Just got done installing the VS.NET 2005 preview and did a small test.
I compared an ArrayList of Rectangles to a ListRectangle, and
timed inserting 1mil rects into each. I also wrote an equivalent c++
app.
Got some interesting results:
ArrayList: 265ms
ListRectangle: 62ms
listrect: 141ms
So it seems with generics .NET is finally faster than c++ (at least,
in this case).
Esta mensagem foi verificada pelo E-mail Protegido Terra.
Scan engine: VirusScan / Atualizado em 10/05/2004 / Versão: 1.5.2
Proteja o seu e-mail Terra: http://www.emailprotegido.terra.com.br/
#region Using directives
using System;
using System.Collections;
using System.Collections.Generic;
using System.Drawing;
#endregion
namespace SpeedTest {
class Program {
static void Main(string[] args) {
ArrayList al = new ArrayList();
ListRectangle rl = new ListRectangle();
DateTime start, end;
GC.Collect();
GC.WaitForPendingFinalizers();
start = DateTime.Now;
for (int i = 0; i 100; i++)
al.Add(new Rectangle(i, i, i, i));
end = DateTime.Now;
Console.WriteLine(Arraylist: {0:F3}ms,
(end-start).TotalMilliseconds);
GC.Collect();
GC.WaitForPendingFinalizers();
start = DateTime.Now;
for (int i = 0; i 100; i++)
rl.Add(new Rectangle(i, i, i, i));
end = DateTime.Now;
Console.WriteLine(ListRectangle: {0:F3}ms, (end
- start).TotalMilliseconds);
}
}
}
#include list
#include iostream
#include ctime
using namespace std;
struct rect {
int x;
int y;
int width;
int height;
};
int main(void) {
listrect rl;
clock_t start=clock();
for(int i=0; i100; i++) {
rect r={i, i, i, i};
rl.push_back(r);
}
clock_t end=clock();
cout listrect:
(((float)(end-start))/((float)CLOCKS_PER_SEC)*1000.0f) ms
endl;
return 0;
}
___
Mono-list maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-list
___
Mono-list maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-list
Re: [Mono-list] offtopic, but cool
Hi Cory!
yeap you're right! I didn't notice the struct was small. I'd like to see
the struct you used in the C++ sample if possible (just 4 ints?)
I'll do the same benchmark later when I get home, and try with different
compilers and allocators. Pretty interesting!
Best regards,
Mello
Cory Nelson wrote:
Yea I thought of that, but doing so made it take twice the time:
listrect* rl;
for(int i=0; i100; i++) {
rect *r=new rect;
r-x=i;
r-y=i;
r-width=i;
r-height=i;
rl.push_back(r);
}
- Original Message -
From: Cesar Mello [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Wed, 12 May 2004 09:41:24 -0300
Subject: Re: [Mono-list] offtopic, but cool
To: Cory Nelson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: mono-list [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hi Cory,
In the C++ sample, you are passing the rect by value, so you are
saving a copy in the list. In C# a reference to the object is used, so
there is no copy-construction overhead.
You can change the listrect to a listrect*, but this way you have
to manage the memory by yourlself.
[]
Mello
Cory Nelson wrote:
Just got done installing the VS.NET 2005 preview and did a small test.
I compared an ArrayList of Rectangles to a ListRectangle, and timed
inserting 1mil rects into each. I also wrote an equivalent c++ app.
Got some interesting results:
ArrayList: 265ms
ListRectangle: 62ms
listrect: 141ms
So it seems with generics .NET is finally faster than c++ (at least,
in this case).
Esta mensagem foi verificada pelo E-mail Protegido Terra.
Scan engine: VirusScan / Atualizado em 10/05/2004 / Versão: 1.5.2
Proteja o seu e-mail Terra: http://www.emailprotegido.terra.com.br/
Esta mensagem foi verificada pelo E-mail Protegido Terra.
Scan engine: VirusScan / Atualizado em 10/05/2004 / Versão: 1.5.2
Proteja o seu e-mail Terra: http://www.emailprotegido.terra.com.br/
___
Mono-list maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-list
Re: [Mono-list] offtopic, but cool
The only difference is the ArrayList requires boxing to Object.
ArrayList:
L_002a: newobj instance void
[System.Drawing]System.Drawing.Rectangle::.ctor(int32, int32, int32,
int32)
L_002f: box [System.Drawing]System.Drawing.Rectangle
L_0034: callvirt instance int32
[mscorlib]System.Collections.ArrayList::Add(object)
ListRectangle:
L_008c: newobj instance void
[System.Drawing]System.Drawing.Rectangle::.ctor(int32, int32, int32,
int32)
L_0091: callvirt instance int32
[mscorlib]System.Collections.Generic.List!1[System.Drawing]System.Drawing.Rectangle::Add(!0)
On Wed, 12 May 2004 10:18:57 -0400, Dan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Cory, I'm curious, did you compare the IL to see whats different?
-Dan
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lluis Sanchez
Sent: Wednesday, May 12, 2004 9:17 AM
To: Cesar Mello
Cc: Cory Nelson; mono-list
Subject: Re: [Mono-list] offtopic, but cool
System.Drawing.Rectangle is a struct, so it is copied by value, not by
reference.
On dc, 2004-05-12 at 14:41, Cesar Mello wrote:
Hi Cory,
In the C++ sample, you are passing the rect by value, so you are
saving a copy in the list. In C# a reference to the object is used, so
there is no copy-construction overhead.
You can change the listrect to a listrect*, but this way you have
to manage the memory by yourlself.
[]
Mello
Cory Nelson wrote:
Just got done installing the VS.NET 2005 preview and did a small test.
I compared an ArrayList of Rectangles to a ListRectangle, and
timed inserting 1mil rects into each. I also wrote an equivalent c++
app.
Got some interesting results:
ArrayList: 265ms
ListRectangle: 62ms
listrect: 141ms
So it seems with generics .NET is finally faster than c++ (at least,
in this case).
Esta mensagem foi verificada pelo E-mail Protegido Terra.
Scan engine: VirusScan / Atualizado em 10/05/2004 / Versão: 1.5.2
Proteja o seu e-mail Terra: http://www.emailprotegido.terra.com.br/
#region Using directives
using System;
using System.Collections;
using System.Collections.Generic;
using System.Drawing;
#endregion
namespace SpeedTest {
class Program {
static void Main(string[] args) {
ArrayList al = new ArrayList();
ListRectangle rl = new ListRectangle();
DateTime start, end;
GC.Collect();
GC.WaitForPendingFinalizers();
start = DateTime.Now;
for (int i = 0; i 100; i++)
al.Add(new Rectangle(i, i, i, i));
end = DateTime.Now;
Console.WriteLine(Arraylist: {0:F3}ms,
(end-start).TotalMilliseconds);
GC.Collect();
GC.WaitForPendingFinalizers();
start = DateTime.Now;
for (int i = 0; i 100; i++)
rl.Add(new Rectangle(i, i, i, i));
end = DateTime.Now;
Console.WriteLine(ListRectangle: {0:F3}ms, (end
- start).TotalMilliseconds);
}
}
}
#include list
#include iostream
#include ctime
using namespace std;
struct rect {
int x;
int y;
int width;
int height;
};
int main(void) {
listrect rl;
clock_t start=clock();
for(int i=0; i100; i++) {
rect r={i, i, i, i};
rl.push_back(r);
}
clock_t end=clock();
cout listrect:
(((float)(end-start))/((float)CLOCKS_PER_SEC)*1000.0f) ms
endl;
return 0;
}
___
Mono-list maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-list
___
Mono-list maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-list
