# Julia position in the Debian Benchmark Game can be improved, and categorization of some Julia there is unfair

**URL:** <https://discourse.julialang.org/t/julia-position-in-the-debian-benchmark-game-can-be-improved-and-categorization-of-some-julia-there-is-unfair/122280>\
**Category:** Performance\
**Created:** [November 5, 2024, 11:22am UTC](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/julia-position-in-the-debian-benchmark-game-can-be-improved-and-categorization-of-some-julia-there-is-unfair/122280 "2024-11-05T11:22:05Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 1\
**Showing post:** 30

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Palli](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/julialang/user_avatar/discourse.julialang.org/palli/32/3380_2.png) [@Palli](https://discourse.julialang.org/u/Palli)\
**Post date:** [December 12, 2024, 9:55pm UTC](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/julia-position-in-the-debian-benchmark-game-can-be-improved-and-categorization-of-some-julia-there-is-unfair/122280/30 "2024-12-12T21:55:46Z")

</div>

> [@foobar\_lv2](#):
>
> Smallish allocations can be done with a bump allocator, which is very fast.

See my experiment with Immix GC:

> [@Improved allocation design, with 4-byte pointers, and sometimes 5-byte in effect](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/improved-allocation-design-with-4-byte-pointers-and-sometimes-5-byte-in-effect/123229/9):
>
> @Oscar_Smith, @GeorgeGkountouras Immix GC (./julia) is confidently 33% faster than Julia 1.11 (with its default GC), for three threads, which is the optimal number for at least than program with (at least) Immix, on this worst-case outlier from Debian Benchmark Game, though only 11% faster than 1.10. Julia 1.11 (default GC) is 17% slower than that Julia 1.10 (default GC), i.e. Immix (1.12.0-DEV.1745) is 33% faster than 1.11. Since the benchmark game uses four threads (all the cores), and I beli…

Such 33% faster (37% faster based on mean) would make Julia climb up to 4.7436 sec. (4.46 sec. if their benchmark uses mean, calculated from 37%) on that benchmark (and improve Julia’s overall rank likely), e.g. climb past C#, and Erlang which is actually faster, and approach Java at 2.62 sec. still 81% slower than it, and 4.9x slower than fastest (C++). We can and should tune it to be able to exploit threads better (now 3 threads, not 4, is optimal).

---

_[View the full topic](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/julia-position-in-the-debian-benchmark-game-can-be-improved-and-categorization-of-some-julia-there-is-unfair/122280)._