Crystal vs. Node.js vs. Golang vs. Julia vs. Rust vs. LuaJIT vs. C Fibonacci Benchmark

#1

Post by seraum » Wed, Dec 21, 2016, 9:19 PM UTC

Crystal vs. Node.js vs. Golang vs. Julia vs. Rust vs. LuaJIT vs. C Fibonacci Benchmark
blog.seraum.com

Re: Crystal vs. Node.js vs. Golang vs. Julia vs. Rust vs. LuaJIT vs. C Fibonacci Benchmark

#2

Post by rubyfan » Wed, Dec 21, 2016, 9:36 PM UTC

I don't love the conclusion, a single Fibonacci benchmark is fairly light evidence to blanket state Crystal is as fast as C. It's also fairly toothless on comparison of other languages.

Re: Crystal vs. Node.js vs. Golang vs. Julia vs. Rust vs. LuaJIT vs. C Fibonacci Benchmark

#3

Post by FourierT-form » Wed, Dec 21, 2016, 9:40 PM UTC

COUGH Tail recursion COUGH

Re: Crystal vs. Node.js vs. Golang vs. Julia vs. Rust vs. LuaJIT vs. C Fibonacci Benchmark

#4

Post by steveklabnik » Wed, Dec 21, 2016, 9:42 PM UTC

How was this stuff compiled? There's no way to reproduce these numbers without compiler flags, at least.

For example, with "rustc fib.rs", I get 10 seconds as a runtime. With "rustc -O fib.rs", to turn on optimizations, I get 0.034s. This makes me pretty sure that they did not turn on optimizations, which means the Rust numbers are very misleading, and possibly, the other languages as well.

Re: Crystal vs. Node.js vs. Golang vs. Julia vs. Rust vs. LuaJIT vs. C Fibonacci Benchmark

#5

Post by chrisdouay » Wed, Dec 21, 2016, 9:47 PM UTC

steveklabnik wrote: post #4

How was this stuff compiled? There's no way to reproduce these numbers without compiler flags, at least. For example, with "rustc fib.rs", I get 10 seconds as a runtime. With "rustc -O fib.rs", to turn on optimizations, I get 0.034s. This makes me pretty sure that they did not turn on optimizations, which means the Rust numbers are very misleading, and possibly, the other languages as well.

I get 0.034s => this means the compiler run the code and puts directly the result in the binary file. So, when you run the binary, it only println(result)

Re: Crystal vs. Node.js vs. Golang vs. Julia vs. Rust vs. LuaJIT vs. C Fibonacci Benchmark

#6

Post by leovonl » Thu, Dec 22, 2016, 5:36 PM UTC

If you compile the Rust example with optimization (-O) it just throws the result away, which gives the ~0.030 time chrisdouay found.

However, if you add a println!() around it, it has to calculate the result. Here's the running time:

    > time ./fib
    1134903170

    real    0m2.242s
    user    0m2.240s
    sys     0m0.000s

I tried the C example as well (with -O2) and found this:

    > time ./cfib
    1134903170

    real    0m4.671s
    user    0m4.670s
    sys     0m0.000s

So.. which one is faster again?

This "comparison" unfortunately seems too naïve to not be on purpose - no analysis, no real discussion, not even some reasoning about the defaults and why the big difference in numbers. It seems to be just looking for views/comments (even if negative) without any intention to produce real content. What worries me are the ones that will take this for a real benchmark and just "share on facebook" and spread more disinformation.