I guess you are still comparing release to debug version. I've ran your code and this is what I've got Win7 x64, VS2015 Update3, Release, x64 Run on (8 X 3392 MHz CPU s) 09/25/16 07:36:53 Benchmark Time CPU Iterations ------------------------------------------------------------ to_wire_xml/8 39564 ns 39980 ns 17949 195.409kB/s to_wire_xml/64 98915 ns 98035 ns 7479 637.527kB/s to_wire_xml/512 583376 ns 583961 ns 1122 856.222kB/s to_wire_xml/4k 4494721 ns 4428415 ns 155 903.258kB/s to_wire_xml/32k 35621888 ns 35100225 ns 20 911.675kB/s to_wire_xml/256k 285296564 ns 280801800 ns 2 911.675kB/s to_wire_xml/2M 2294702350 ns 2293214700 ns 1 893.069kB/s to_wire_xml/4M 4596100456 ns 4586429400 ns 1 893.069kB/s from_wire_xml/8 44701 ns 44361 ns 15473 176.11kB/s from_wire_xml/64 97779 ns 98035 ns 7479 637.527kB/s from_wire_xml/512 523956 ns 530403 ns 1000 942.679kB/s from_wire_xml/4k 3919513 ns 3877482 ns 173 1031.6kB/s from_wire_xml/32k 30990532 ns 31200200 ns 22 1025.63kB/s from_wire_xml/256k 248254367 ns 249601600 ns 3 1025.63kB/s from_wire_xml/2M 1990579271 ns 1981212700 ns 1 1033.71kB/s from_wire_xml/8M 7927240207 ns 7924850800 ns 1 1033.71kB/s to_wire_text/8 13381 ns 13142 ns 49857 594.483kB/s to_wire_text/64 31969 ns 31985 ns 22436 1.90827MB/s to_wire_text/512 180335 ns 179751 ns 4079 2.71643MB/s to_wire_text/4k 1363654 ns 1375560 ns 499 2.83975MB/s to_wire_text/32k 10990438 ns 10968820 ns 64 2.84898MB/s to_wire_text/256k 86883137 ns 88400567 ns 9 2.82804MB/s to_wire_text/2M 696132001 ns 686404400 ns 1 2.91373MB/s to_wire_text/4M 1398212634 ns 1388408900 ns 1 2.881MB/s from_wire_text/8 11158 ns 11195 ns 64102 697.873kB/s from_wire_text/64 25274 ns 25588 ns 28045 2.38534MB/s from_wire_text/512 138245 ns 137666 ns 4986 3.54685MB/s from_wire_text/4k 1047166 ns 1046497 ns 641 3.73269MB/s from_wire_text/32k 8304279 ns 8320053 ns 90 3.75599MB/s from_wire_text/256k 66510527 ns 66654973 ns 11 3.75066MB/s from_wire_text/2M 533393808 ns 530403400 ns 1 3.77071MB/s from_wire_text/4M 1055956857 ns 1060806800 ns 1 3.77071MB/s to_wire_binary/8 5444 ns 5460 ns 100000 1.39732MB/s to_wire_binary/64 5411 ns 5424 ns 112179 11.2538MB/s to_wire_binary/512 5523 ns 5563 ns 112179 87.7797MB/s to_wire_binary/4k 5966 ns 5980 ns 112179 653.244MB/s to_wire_binary/32k 28940 ns 29412 ns 24929 1062.5MB/s to_wire_binary/256k 251626 ns 250358 ns 2804 998.569MB/s to_wire_binary/2M 2548630 ns 2540925 ns 264 787.115MB/s to_wire_binary/4M 6361041 ns 6407184 ns 112 624.299MB/s from_wire_binary/8 5363 ns 5284 ns 112179 1.44375MB/s from_wire_binary/64 5371 ns 5460 ns 100000 11.1785MB/s from_wire_binary/512 5386 ns 5460 ns 100000 89.4282MB/s from_wire_binary/4k 5483 ns 5424 ns 112179 720.244MB/s from_wire_binary/32k 7685 ns 7649 ns 89743 3.98998GB/s from_wire_binary/256k 25332 ns 25588 ns 28045 9.54136GB/s from_wire_binary/2M 620654 ns 625672 ns 1122 3.12164GB/s from_wire_binary/4M 1306333 ns 1306960 ns 561 2.98881GB/s -----Original Message----- From: Boost-users [mailto:boost-users-bounces@lists.boost.org] On Behalf Of Georg Gast Sent: Sunday, September 25, 2016 6:42 AM To: boost-users@lists.boost.org Subject: Re: [Boost-users] [serialization] Runtime overhead of serialization archives Am 22.09.2016 um 22:38 schrieb Chris Glover:
For what it's worth, in tests I've done in the past, binary serialization using boost.serialization and other similar systems was not this big of a difference compared to memcpy. I was seeing maybe a 5x to 10x difference compared to memcpy (yours is 50x).
Of course, this depends on a lot of factors, like how much data this is because it would determine if you are memory bound or not, but I am wondering if your cstyle tests are actually being completely optimized away. Have you examined the disassembly? If you find the code is being optimized away, Google Benchmark has a handy "benchmark::DoNotOptimize" function to help keep the optimizer from throwing away the side effects of a particular address.
Hi, i have prepared a comparison of the same code between linux and windows (msvc). There is such a huge gap between linux and windows. I am not sure, if i should post the images to this mailing list. AFAIK is it seen as bad behaviour to post non text to this list, so i added the link. https://www.schorsch-tech.de/doku.php?id=c:boost_serialization&#windows Has anyone an idea why this is the case? Look at this diagrams, i cant explain whats happening here. its on the same maschine on bare metal (no VM). Georg _______________________________________________ Boost-users mailing list Boost-users@lists.boost.org http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost-users