I believe you're not measuring it correctly. A trivial String::GetHashCode benchmark[1] shows llvm been 22% faster. This is with a recent mono.
[1]https://gist.github.com/kumpera/7947579 On Fri, Dec 13, 2013 at 11:52 AM, Rodrigo Kumpera <[email protected]> wrote: > Can you file a bug on profiling with llvm enabled? It's supposed to work. > > > On Wed, Dec 11, 2013 at 8:47 AM, xplicit <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Is there a way to run mono profiler when mono compiled with llvm support? >> When I run >> mono --profile=log >> mono says that it can't find mono-profiler-log in libraries (because there >> is no libmono-profiler-log.* in /usr/lib) nor in executable. If I compile >> mono without llvm support profiler starts as expected. My platform is >> linux >> 32 bit, mono from master branch. >> >> Also where can I look into code samples, which definitely execute faster >> on >> mono with --llvm option? I tried two tests - web server (runs 30% slower >> with llvm), String.GetHashCode() and String.GetCaseInsensitiveHashCode() - >> same speed with llvm and without llvm. Would like to know what types of >> code >> I can use with llvm to increase performance. >> > > Are you comparing wallclock time of the whole execution or only after > warmup? LLVM is > an order of magnitude slower at compiling code than the default JIT, so > you must > account for that. > >
_______________________________________________ Mono-list maillist - [email protected] http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-list
