Most of the other benchmarks shown are Lua ports of standard benchmarks. SciMark for Lua has been split up into individual benchmarks which are run with a fixed iteration count (to get a runtime and not an auto-scaled score). The presented benchmark results are only indicative of the overall performance of each VM. Lua Node js - Which programs are fastest? Always look at the source code. These are only the fastest programs. All he's done is uploaded a benchmark of his Lua engine vs SFML C engine and you suddenly go all defensive and start being rude to him. Perhap's you shouldn't even reply to comments seeing as when viewing your posts the first one includes a quote of someone saying your being offensive.
Here's a performance comparison of LuaJIT against other VMs on differentarchitectures: Vuescan free download without watermark mac.
- x86/x64: Intel Core2 E8400 3.0 GHz
- ARM: Texas Instruments OMAP4460 1.2 GHz Cortex-A9
- PPC: FreeScale MPC8377E 800 MHz PPC/e300c4
- PPC/e500: FreeScale MPC8572E 1.5 GHz PPC/e500v2
- MIPS: MIPS 74Kc+FPU 78 MHz MIPS32R2
All measurements have been taken under Linux 2.6.All shown Lua benchmarks are single-threaded, so only a singleCPU core was used. The system was freshly booted and otherwise idle. Allpower-management features have been turned off, no hypervisor module wasloaded. It was ensured all executable code and data files were cached inmemory prior to each measurement.
The C code of all VMs was compiled with GCC 4.4.3 with the defaultcompiler flags given in the Makefiles (except for Lua on x86 where-O2 -fomit-frame-pointer was used).
The base for the comparisons are the user CPU times as reported by theshell built-in time command (i.e. TIMEFORMAT='%U').The accuracy of the timings is limited by the 250Hz system timerfrequency, which may result in a divergence of up to ±4ms.All benchmarks are run three times for each VM — only the bestresult is reported here.
If possible, all benchmark runs have been scaled for runtimes in themulti-second to minutes range to improve the overall measurementaccuracy. The only exceptions are for non-scalable benchmarksor when out-of-cache effects would dominate the execution time(e.g. array3d). The variance between identical runs is generally verylow (< 0.5%) and is not shown (whiskers would clump together inthe bar graph).
Startup time for running the executable of the VM itself is included inall measurements, but is negligible (< 100µs).Likewise, warm-up and compile-time for the JIT compilers is included.But, again, this has no measurable effect, since LuaJIT's compiler warmsup very quickly (LJ1: 1st call of method, LJ2: 57th loop iteration) andis exceptionally fast (compile times in the microsecond to millisecondrange).
About the Benchmarks
Most of the benchmarks have their origins in theComputer Language Benchmarks Game.It presents acomparison of the performance of different languages and implementationsfor a small set of benchmarks. Many of these benchmarks have changedover time (both spec and code) and the selection of benchmarks has varieda lot, too. Benchmark results shown in previous versions of LuaJIT or theCLBG are not directly comparable. Note that the CLBG currently only showsLua, not LuaJIT.
Lua Vs C Benchmark Download
Most of the other benchmarks shown are Lua ports of standard benchmarks.E.g. SciMark for Lua has been splitup into individual benchmarks which are run with a fixed iteration count(to get a runtime and not an auto-scaled score).
Lua Vs C Benchmark Free
The presented benchmark results are only indicative of the overallperformance of each VM. They should not be construed as an exactprediction for the possible speedup of any specific application. It'sadvisable to benchmark your own application code before drawingany conclusions.