Re: v8 first impressions

talksmall <[email protected]> Mon, 8 Sep 2008 02:03:58 -0700 (PDT)
Newsgroups gmane.comp.lang.smalltalk.strongtalk
Message-ID <b9b02cf4-f714-4421-a073-d763a8de465c@c58g2000hsc.googlegroups.com>
Hi Dave,
Yes, I did. I emulated the "iterate for a second" loop from the V8
test and put it into a method. I then ran the test several times, with
only a marginal improvement (< 1ms). I took the same approach for all
of the Smalltalk tests, though it shouldn't make any difference to the
others since they don't implement adaptive optimization.

Regards, Steve

On Sep 8, 9:13=A0am, "David Griswold" <[email protected]>
wrote:
> Hi Steve,
> That's interesting. =A0On Strongtalk did you run the test multiple times =
with
> the top level loop in a method (not a doit) to avoid the on-stack
> replacement problem? =A0 If not, Strongtalk might be even faster than tha=
t,
> since in general it is more than twice as fast as VisualWorks (or at leas=
t
> used to be). =A0But at least it confirms my intuition that V8 would be on=
 the
> same order of performance as VW.
> -Dave
>
> On Sun, Sep 7, 2008 at 5:47 PM, talksmall <[email protected]>wr=
ote:
>
>
>
> > I ran a comparison of the Richards benchmark for which both Javascript
> > and Smalltalk versions are available.
>
> > The version released with V8 isn't exactly comparable to the standard
> > version since it uses a count of 1000 rather than 10000. With that
> > tweaked to match the standard count I ran a comparison of V8 against a
> > selection of Smalltalk VMs - VisualWorks NC, Squeak, GNU Smalltalk and
> > Strongtalk.
>
> > I customised the Smalltalk tests to follow the same methodology as the
> > V8 benchmarks - iterating the test for a second and then dividing by
> > the number of iterations.
>
> > The results are interesting
>
> > Strongtalk: =A0 =A07.335ms
> > VW: =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 13.013ms
> > V8: =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 13.648ms
> > GNUSmalltalk: 91.090ms
> > Squeak: =A0 =A0 =A0102.600ms
>
> > All of the tests were run on a Vista 64 Quad core machine at 2.66 GHz,
> > though in each case I was running a 32 bit VM (since not all the VMs
> > have 64 bit builds).
>
> > Regards, Steve
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "=
Strongtalk-general" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to strongtalk-general+unsubscrib=
[email protected]
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/strong=
talk-general?hl=3Den
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---