Benchmark: C++ vs C#
codeproject.com
Benchmark: C++ vs C#
1–10 of 36 posts
Re: Benchmark: C++ vs C#
#2I think he hit the nail on the head referring to c# programmers in general not being as "performance conscious" which leads the misconception that c# is a much slower language to use.
I've worked in many places and have come across the same thing. As a c++ programmer I have also worked with c# coders and am often shocked at their slap-dash approach to software engineering.
I'm not saying they're all like that but it seems to be a common trend in my opinion!
Re: Benchmark: C++ vs C#
#3The benchmark numbers for the Compact Framework on ARM make this a lot more interesting. I used it on PowerPC (the XBox 360 .NET runtime used by XNA is based on the Compact Framework), and I was uncertain whether the issues were related to the PowerPC architecture. It looks like the Compact Framework is just bad.
Re: Benchmark: C++ vs C#
#4The poor guy is taking a beating in the code-project comments which is a pity since he obviously spent some time putting it together. In a comparison like this, you are always going to get people on either side of the fence claiming the results are invalid because there was some compiler switch or code construct that was missed.
The language-agnostic version of this article: you can write slow code in any language.
Re: Benchmark: C++ vs C#
#5The benchmark numbers for the Compact Framework on ARM make this a lot more interesting. I used it on PowerPC (the XBox 360 .NET runtime used by XNA is based on the Compact Framework), and I was uncertain whether the issues were related to the PowerPC architecture. It looks like the Compact Framework is just bad.
I wonder if this is the same thing that's used in WP7. Bad news if it is, I guess...
Re: Benchmark: C++ vs C#
#6We've been aware of how slow CF is on Windows CE for a while. Here are some benchmarks we have run:
CuWin 3500, CE5, NS Basic/CE 8 NS Basic/CE: 26529 loops/second Microsoft .NET: 133 loops/second
Acer beTouch E101 Windows Mobile 6.5, 528 mhz, NS Basic/CE 8.0 NS Basic/CE: NS Basic/CE: 16669 loops/second Microsoft .NET: 3060 loops/second
CuWin 5500, CE6, NS Basic/CE 8 NS Basic/CE: 14394 loops/second Microsoft .NET: 764 loops/second
i-mate 400mhz, WM5, NS Basic/CE 8.0 NS Basic/CE: 12632 loops/second Microsoft .NET: 1290 loops/second
Running the same test under NS Basic/App Studio, an iPhone 4 scores 282,674, Nexus One is 403,000 and the Motorola Xoom is 718,484. Plainly, Windows CE.NET has a long way to go!
Re: Benchmark: C++ vs C#
#7He did not say if optimizations were turned on for the debug builds, and I'm not familiar enough with Visual C++ to know what the defaults are. You can still have DEBUG defined so that asserts are compiled in when optimizations are on. However, looking at the results, I suspect optimizations were turned off, which makes those results meaningless.
Re: Benchmark: C++ vs C#
#8The results seem conclusive: if you're developing software for the desktop, and (like me) you are equally skilled in C# and C++, it's safe to take advantage of the simpler syntax, rich standard libraries, stellar IntelliSense and reduced development effort that C# offers.
With the glaring exception of numeric code, which is the most crucial thing for a lot of apps that are now written in C++. You'd be crazy to write a native CRUD app in C++ now but most of the big C++ apps I can think of do heavy work in numerics (Photoshop, Ableton, Maya, etc).
Re: Benchmark: C++ vs C#
#9I have heard that you can expect a 10-15% difference in most cases. However, it seems that there are just some arenas that C# wont quite measure up. I'm thinking multimedia applications would not scale well. Mainly because there is no way via Microsoft's .NET implementation to access SSE or other processor intrinsics. I know that mono announced that this a year or two ago, anyone have experience with it?
Re: Benchmark: C++ vs C#
#10The results seem conclusive: if you're developing software for the desktop, and (like me) you are equally skilled in C# and C++, it's safe to take advantage of the simpler syntax, rich standard libraries, stellar IntelliSense and reduced development effort that C# offers. With the glaring exception of numeric code, which is the most crucial thing for a lot of apps that are now written in C++. You'd be crazy to write…
For these the best approach is to write the whole app in some higher-than-C++ level language with performance critical parts (usually less than 10 percent) in C/C++.