>
> On 6 November 2010 17:26, Levente Uzonyi <
[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, 4 Nov 2010, Stefan Marr wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Hi Bert:
>>>
>>> On 04 Nov 2010, at 20:20, Bert Freudenberg wrote:
>>>
>>>>>> So RoarVM is about 4 times slower in sends, even more so for bytecodes.
>>>>>> It needs 8 cores to be faster the regular interpreter on a single core. To
>>>>>> the good news is that it can beat the old interpreter :) But why is it so
>>>>>> much slower than the normal interpreter?
>>>>>
>>>>> Well, one the one hand, we don't use stuff like the GCC label-as-value
>>>>> extension to have threaded-interpretation, which should help quite a bit.
>>>>> Then, the current implementation based on pthreads is quite a bit slower
>>>>> then our version which uses plain Unix processes.
>>>>> The GC is really not state of the art.
>>>>> And all that adds up rather quickly I suppose...
>>>>
>>>> Hmm, that doesn't sound like it should make it 4x slower ...
>>>
>>> Do you know some numbers for the switch/case-based vs. the threaded
>>> version on the standard VM?
>>> How much do you typically gain by it?
>>
>> If threaded means gnuified (jump table instead of the linear search), then
>> it gives ~2x speedup for the standard SqueakVM.
>>
> to my own experience it gives 30%