Why are operators so much slower than method calls? (structs are slower only on older JITs)
Solution 1:
I'm getting very different results, much less dramatic. But didn't use the test runner, I pasted the code into a console mode app. The 5% result is ~87% in 32-bit mode, ~100% in 64-bit mode when I try it.
Alignment is critical on doubles, the .NET runtime can only promise an alignment of 4 on a 32-bit machine. Looks to me the test runner is starting the test methods with a stack address that's aligned to 4 instead of 8. The misalignment penalty gets very large when the double crosses a cache line boundary.
Solution 2:
I'm having some difficulty replicating your results.
I took your code:
- made it a standalone console application
- built an optimized (release) build
- increased the "size" factor from 2.5M to 10M
- ran it from the command line (outside the IDE)
When I did so, I got the following timings which are far different from yours. For the avoidance of doubt, I'll post exactly the code I used.
Here are my timings
Populating List<Element> took 527ms.
The PlusEqual() method took 450ms.
The 'same' += operator took 386ms.
The 'same' -= operator took 446ms.
The PlusEqual(double, double) method took 413ms.
The do nothing loop took 229ms.
The ratio of operator with constructor to method is 85%.
The ratio of operator without constructor to method is 99%.
The ratio of PlusEqual(double,double) to PlusEqual(Element) is 91%.
If we remove the overhead time for the loop accessing the elements from the List...
The ratio of operator with constructor to method is 71%.
The ratio of operator without constructor to method is 98%.
The ratio of PlusEqual(double,double) to PlusEqual(Element) is 83%.
And these are my edits to your code:
namespace OperatorVsMethod
{
public struct Element
{
public double Left;
public double Right;
public Element(double left, double right)
{
this.Left = left;
this.Right = right;
}
public static Element operator +(Element x, Element y)
{
return new Element(x.Left + y.Left, x.Right + y.Right);
}
public static Element operator -(Element x, Element y)
{
x.Left += y.Left;
x.Right += y.Right;
return x;
}
/// <summary>
/// Like the += operator; but faster.
/// </summary>
public void PlusEqual(Element that)
{
this.Left += that.Left;
this.Right += that.Right;
}
/// <summary>
/// Like the += operator; but faster.
/// </summary>
public void PlusEqual(double thatLeft, double thatRight)
{
this.Left += thatLeft;
this.Right += thatRight;
}
}
public class UnitTest1
{
public static void Main()
{
Stopwatch stopwatch = new Stopwatch();
// Populate a List of Elements to multiply together
int seedSize = 4;
List<double> doubles = new List<double>(seedSize);
doubles.Add(2.5d);
doubles.Add(100000d);
doubles.Add(-0.5d);
doubles.Add(-100002d);
int size = 10000000 * seedSize;
List<Element> elts = new List<Element>(size);
stopwatch.Reset();
stopwatch.Start();
for (int ii = 0; ii < size; ++ii)
{
int di = ii % seedSize;
double d = doubles[di];
elts.Add(new Element(d, d));
}
stopwatch.Stop();
long populateMS = stopwatch.ElapsedMilliseconds;
// Measure speed of += operator (calls ctor)
Element operatorCtorResult = new Element(1d, 1d);
stopwatch.Reset();
stopwatch.Start();
for (int ii = 0; ii < size; ++ii)
{
operatorCtorResult += elts[ii];
}
stopwatch.Stop();
long operatorCtorMS = stopwatch.ElapsedMilliseconds;
// Measure speed of -= operator (+= without ctor)
Element operatorNoCtorResult = new Element(1d, 1d);
stopwatch.Reset();
stopwatch.Start();
for (int ii = 0; ii < size; ++ii)
{
operatorNoCtorResult -= elts[ii];
}
stopwatch.Stop();
long operatorNoCtorMS = stopwatch.ElapsedMilliseconds;
// Measure speed of PlusEqual(Element) method
Element plusEqualResult = new Element(1d, 1d);
stopwatch.Reset();
stopwatch.Start();
for (int ii = 0; ii < size; ++ii)
{
plusEqualResult.PlusEqual(elts[ii]);
}
stopwatch.Stop();
long plusEqualMS = stopwatch.ElapsedMilliseconds;
// Measure speed of PlusEqual(double, double) method
Element plusEqualDDResult = new Element(1d, 1d);
stopwatch.Reset();
stopwatch.Start();
for (int ii = 0; ii < size; ++ii)
{
Element elt = elts[ii];
plusEqualDDResult.PlusEqual(elt.Left, elt.Right);
}
stopwatch.Stop();
long plusEqualDDMS = stopwatch.ElapsedMilliseconds;
// Measure speed of doing nothing but accessing the Element
Element doNothingResult = new Element(1d, 1d);
stopwatch.Reset();
stopwatch.Start();
for (int ii = 0; ii < size; ++ii)
{
Element elt = elts[ii];
double left = elt.Left;
double right = elt.Right;
}
stopwatch.Stop();
long doNothingMS = stopwatch.ElapsedMilliseconds;
// Report speeds
Console.WriteLine("Populating List<Element> took {0}ms.", populateMS);
Console.WriteLine("The PlusEqual() method took {0}ms.", plusEqualMS);
Console.WriteLine("The 'same' += operator took {0}ms.", operatorCtorMS);
Console.WriteLine("The 'same' -= operator took {0}ms.", operatorNoCtorMS);
Console.WriteLine("The PlusEqual(double, double) method took {0}ms.", plusEqualDDMS);
Console.WriteLine("The do nothing loop took {0}ms.", doNothingMS);
// Compare speeds
long percentageRatio = 100L * operatorCtorMS / plusEqualMS;
Console.WriteLine("The ratio of operator with constructor to method is {0}%.", percentageRatio);
percentageRatio = 100L * operatorNoCtorMS / plusEqualMS;
Console.WriteLine("The ratio of operator without constructor to method is {0}%.", percentageRatio);
percentageRatio = 100L * plusEqualDDMS / plusEqualMS;
Console.WriteLine("The ratio of PlusEqual(double,double) to PlusEqual(Element) is {0}%.", percentageRatio);
operatorCtorMS -= doNothingMS;
operatorNoCtorMS -= doNothingMS;
plusEqualMS -= doNothingMS;
plusEqualDDMS -= doNothingMS;
Console.WriteLine("If we remove the overhead time for the loop accessing the elements from the List...");
percentageRatio = 100L * operatorCtorMS / plusEqualMS;
Console.WriteLine("The ratio of operator with constructor to method is {0}%.", percentageRatio);
percentageRatio = 100L * operatorNoCtorMS / plusEqualMS;
Console.WriteLine("The ratio of operator without constructor to method is {0}%.", percentageRatio);
percentageRatio = 100L * plusEqualDDMS / plusEqualMS;
Console.WriteLine("The ratio of PlusEqual(double,double) to PlusEqual(Element) is {0}%.", percentageRatio);
}
}
}
Solution 3:
Running .NET 4.0 here. I compiled with "Any CPU", targeting .NET 4.0 in release mode. Execution was from the command line. It ran in 64-bit mode. My timings are a bit different.
Populating List<Element> took 442ms.
The PlusEqual() method took 115ms.
The 'same' += operator took 201ms.
The 'same' -= operator took 200ms.
The PlusEqual(double, double) method took 129ms.
The do nothing loop took 93ms.
The ratio of operator with constructor to method is 174%.
The ratio of operator without constructor to method is 173%.
The ratio of PlusEqual(double,double) to PlusEqual(Element) is 112%.
If we remove the overhead time for the loop accessing the elements from the List
...
The ratio of operator with constructor to method is 490%.
The ratio of operator without constructor to method is 486%.
The ratio of PlusEqual(double,double) to PlusEqual(Element) is 163%.
In particular, PlusEqual(Element) is slightly faster than PlusEqual(double, double).
Whatever the problem is in .NET 3.5, it doesn't appear to exist in .NET 4.0.
Solution 4:
Like @Corey Kosak, I just ran this code in VS 2010 Express as a simple Console App in Release mode. I get very different numbers. But I also have Fx4.5 so these might not be the results for a clean Fx4.0 .
Populating List<Element> took 435ms.
The PlusEqual() method took 109ms.
The 'same' += operator took 217ms.
The 'same' -= operator took 157ms.
The PlusEqual(double, double) method took 118ms.
The do nothing loop took 79ms.
The ratio of operator with constructor to method is 199%.
The ratio of operator without constructor to method is 144%.
The ratio of PlusEqual(double,double) to PlusEqual(Element) is 108%.
If we remove the overhead time for the loop accessing the elements from the List
...
The ratio of operator with constructor to method is 460%.
The ratio of operator without constructor to method is 260%.
The ratio of PlusEqual(double,double) to PlusEqual(Element) is 130%.
Edit: and now run from the cmd line. That does make a difference, and less variation in the numbers.