Re: Managed vs Unmanaged Bare Bones Performance Test
- From: "Chris Mullins [MVP]" <cmullins@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2007 14:20:51 -0700
[Snip All]
This has been done a huge number of times, by a wide variety of people. In
just about every case, it's turned out performance is surprisingly equal.
There are occasionally some very subtle things that go on though, that make
what looks like an "apples to apples" test turn out now to be the case.
For example:
http://www.wintellect.com/cs/blogs/jeffreyr/archive/2004/11/13/field-access-versus-local-variable-access-performance.aspx
As someone who writes high performance code for s living, I can also say
that "bad performing code" is generally a red-herring. There are typically
very few spots in any given program that are truly performance bottlnecks,
and the only way to find these is to use a good profiler.
--
Chris Mullins, MCSD.NET, MCPD:Enterprise, Microsoft C# MVP
http://www.coversant.com/blogs/cmullins
.
- References:
- Managed vs Unmanaged Bare Bones Performance Test
- From: adhingra
- Managed vs Unmanaged Bare Bones Performance Test
- Prev by Date: Re: Managed vs Unmanaged Bare Bones Performance Test
- Next by Date: Re: Managed vs Unmanaged Bare Bones Performance Test
- Previous by thread: Re: Managed vs Unmanaged Bare Bones Performance Test
- Next by thread: Re: Managed vs Unmanaged Bare Bones Performance Test
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
