Comments on: How much faster is Ruby on Linux?

By: Ruby on Rails slow? Try Unix. – msayson

Ruby on Rails slow? Try Unix. – msayson — Fri, 29 Apr 2016 23:37:06 +0000

[…] For instance, test builds that take a few seconds to run on Linux often take up to a minute on Windows. The difference for general Ruby tasks is supposedly closer to 70% – 100% faster on Linux than on Windows. (http://programmingzen.com/2009/08/10/how-much-faster-is-ruby-on-linux/) […]

By: Isaac Gouy

Isaac Gouy — Thu, 17 Sep 2009 20:46:46 +0000

So the computer language benchmarks game has always been showing Ruby in a most favorable light 😉

By: The Rubyist: August 2009 Edition

The Rubyist: August 2009 Edition — Tue, 08 Sep 2009 01:09:31 +0000

[…] How much faster is Ruby on Linux? […]

By: Jon

Jon — Wed, 19 Aug 2009 15:51:16 +0000

@Antonio: FYI, updated preview2 releases of the RubyInstaller for Windows have recently been released at http://rubyinstaller.org/ in case you’re not already aware.

Ruby 1.8.6 updated to p383 and 1.9.1 updated to p243 in addition to new CHM-based documentation for core and stdlib.

Jon

By: Evgeniy Dolzhenko

Evgeniy Dolzhenko — Wed, 19 Aug 2009 08:17:28 +0000

That would be great to have the comparison of the same Ruby version but on Windows host and virtualized Linux guest on the same host, could be helpful for those who develop on Windows machines in making decision to switch to Linux/run virtual machine, etc.

By: roger

roger — Tue, 11 Aug 2009 22:06:45 +0000

I think the good news here is that ruby on windows is *only* 70% slower–I guess this means that 1.9 on windows is faster than 1.8 in Linux 🙂

If you compare jruby times on windows and linux, you see similar speed differences–I think so anyway.

And yes, as noted above, I/O reading tests are far slower in windows as currently the I/O is very slow for some reason in 1.9 + windows.

Thanks for the writeup.
-r

By: Antonio Cangiano

Antonio Cangiano — Tue, 11 Aug 2009 10:57:44 +0000

Thanks Alex. I appreciate it. 🙂

By: Alex

Alex — Tue, 11 Aug 2009 06:00:36 +0000

Thanks Antonio for the tests and for your kind citation. It is interesting indeed to see that Windows is becoming a worthy platform at least for the dev/stg phases.

(BTW, love your book and your writing style 🙂

By: K159

K159 — Mon, 10 Aug 2009 21:07:07 +0000

MinGW uses either crtdll.dll or msvcrt.dll that ships with windows. crtdll.dll is only available in 32Bit and is fairly old (mine is from 2004) and has problem with threading and is generally considered slow. msvrt.dll is newer but lacking optimisation as well.

Maybe someone can create a Visual C++ build or an Intel C++ build and test it?

By: Antonio Cangiano

Antonio Cangiano — Mon, 10 Aug 2009 20:21:44 +0000

Steve, the approach taken is simple, but statistically sound. I don’t average the ratios. I calculate the ratio for each test, and then at the end I calculate the geometric mean of these ratios. It’s a valid way of summarizing the outcome of these benchmarks.