From: "M. Edward (Ed) Borasky" <znmeb@...>
Date: 2007-09-24T16:23:52+09:00
Subject: Re: Latest benchmarks

Charles Oliver Nutter wrote:
> M. Edward (Ed) Borasky wrote:
>> So ... in a nutshell ... 1.9.0 is five times as fast as 1.8.6!
> 
> I'd be careful about making that assertion. The benchmarks in Ruby 1.9
> are specific areas that Koichi has optimized to make 1.9 run them
> faster. There are other areas, especially as regards core classes and
> evaluated code, where 1.9 is no faster or even slower.
> 
> Not trying to rain on the parade, but even Koichi has recommended not
> taking the 1.9 benchmark numbers as indicative of overall performance.
> 
> - Charlie
> 
> 
Well ... I'll agree with that after looking at the codes. They're
definitely micro-benchmarks and probably won't stress the cache/RAM
interface on modern chips. I'm hoping to get a Rails benchmark running
in the next few days -- it looks like it will be either Substruct or
rTPlan, whichever one is easiest to install. I don't suppose you have a
Rails benchmark laying around in your repositories.  :)

Meanwhile, I ran them on the Athlon64 X2 and got slightly better results
-- which scale by cycle time as well. Unfortunately CodeAnalyst won't
tell me much on the T-Bird -- the chip is too ancient to interact
correctly with the profiler. But I should be able to get some pretty
good profiles on the Athlon64 X2 with it.