Codon VS Crystal benchmarks

Current benchmark data was generated on Thu Jul 13 2023, full log can be found HERE

CONTRIBUTIONS are WELCOME!

[x86_64][2 cores] Intel(R) Xeon(R) Platinum 8370C CPU @ 2.80GHz (Model 106)

* -m in a file name stands for multi-threading or multi-processing

* -i in a file name stands for direct intrinsics usage. (Usage of simd intrinsics via libraries is not counted)

* -ffi in a file name stands for non-stdlib FFI usage

* (You may find time < time(user) + time(sys) for some non-parallelized programs, the overhead is from GC or JIT compiler, which are allowed to take advantage of multi-cores as that's more close to real-world scenarios.)

helloworld

Input: QwQ

lang code time stddev peak-mem mem time(user) time(sys) compiler compiler/runtime
crystal 1.cr 2.3ms 0.5ms 3.0MB 0ms 0ms crystal 1.9.0
codon 1.py 4.0ms 0.6ms 5.1MB 0ms 0ms codon 0.16.2

nbody

Input: 5000000

lang code time stddev peak-mem mem time(user) time(sys) compiler compiler/runtime
crystal 2.cr 450ms 0.3ms 2.9MB 437ms 0ms crystal 1.9.0
crystal 1.cr 468ms 29ms 3.0MB 457ms 0ms crystal 1.9.0
codon 1.py 1947ms 41ms 7.2MB 1933ms 0ms codon 0.16.2

Input: 500000

lang code time stddev peak-mem mem time(user) time(sys) compiler compiler/runtime
crystal 2.cr 48ms 0.1ms 2.9MB 40ms 0ms crystal 1.9.0
crystal 1.cr 48ms 0.8ms 3.0MB 40ms 0ms crystal 1.9.0
codon 1.py 198ms 2.4ms 7.3MB 190ms 0ms codon 0.16.2

nsieve

Input: 12

lang code time stddev peak-mem mem time(user) time(sys) compiler compiler/runtime
crystal 2.cr 458ms 6.2ms 8.0MB 443ms 0ms crystal 1.9.0
crystal 1.cr 604ms 9.8ms 42.6MB 583ms 0ms crystal 1.9.0
codon 1.py 682ms 64ms 44.5MB 657ms 10ms codon 0.16.2
codon 2.py 911ms 35ms 104.9MB 883ms 13ms codon 0.16.2

Input: 10

lang code time stddev peak-mem mem time(user) time(sys) compiler compiler/runtime
crystal 2.cr 103ms 0.3ms 4.1MB 90ms 0ms crystal 1.9.0
crystal 1.cr 140ms 4.1ms 13.0MB 127ms 0ms crystal 1.9.0
codon 1.py 150ms 1.1ms 15.1MB 140ms 0ms codon 0.16.2
codon 2.py 202ms 0.9ms 25.6MB 183ms 7ms codon 0.16.2