String.charAt vs StringBuilder.charAt performance
Roger Riggs
roger.riggs at oracle.com
Mon Jul 21 18:11:58 UTC 2025
Hi Brett,
I'd suggest separate initialization and test methods for the two cases
to get more reliable numbers.
By using @Trial and using a common field for the test data, I think you
have handicapped C2.
The training runs JMH does to warm up C2 are 'seeing' two different
types for the value of sequence.
Making the test runs independent will remov doubt about interactions due
to the test setup.
Roger
On 7/21/25 1:43 PM, Brett Okken wrote:
> > output labeled as StringBuffer but the jmh creates StringBuilder.
>
> Ugh - sorry about that. But yes - this is about StringBuilder vs String.
>
> > I would not be surprised that C2 has more optimizations for String
> than for StringBuilder.
>
> If that were true, it would not surprise me. However, these tests show
> the opposite. String is /slower/ than StringBuilder.
>
> On Mon, Jul 21, 2025 at 12:34 PM Roger Riggs <roger.riggs at oracle.com>
> wrote:
>
> Hi Brett,
>
> The labeling of the output is confusing, the test output labeled
> as StringBuffer but the jmh creates StringBuilder.
> (StringBuffer methods are all synchronized and could explain why
> they are slower).
>
> Also, I would not be surprised that C2 has more optimizations for
> String than for StringBuilder.
>
> Regards, Roger
>
> On 7/19/25 6:09 PM, Brett Okken wrote:
>> Making sequence a local variable does improve things (especially
>> for ascii), but a substantial difference remains. It appears that
>> the performance difference for ascii goes all the way back to jdk
>> 11. The difference for non-ascii showed up in jdk 21. I wonder if
>> this is related to the index checks?
>>
>> jdk 11
>>
>> Benchmark (data) (source) Mode Cnt Score Error Units
>> test ascii String avgt 3 1137.348 ± 12.835
>> ns/op
>> test ascii StringBuffer avgt 3 712.874 ± 509.320
>> ns/op
>> test non-ascii String avgt 3 668.657 ± 246.550
>> ns/op
>> test non-ascii StringBuffer avgt 3 897.344 ± 4353.414
>> ns/op
>>
>>
>> jdk 17
>> Benchmark (data) (source) Mode Cnt Score Error Units
>> test ascii String avgt 3 1321.497 ± 2107.466
>> ns/op
>> test ascii StringBuffer avgt 3 715.936 ± 412.189
>> ns/op
>> test non-ascii String avgt 3 722.986 ± 443.389
>> ns/op
>> test non-ascii StringBuffer avgt 3 722.787 ± 771.816
>> ns/op
>>
>>
>> jdk 21
>> Benchmark (data) (source) Mode Cnt Score Error Units
>> test ascii String avgt 3 1150.301 ┬▒ 918.549
>> ns/op
>> test ascii StringBuffer avgt 3 713.183 ┬▒ 543.850
>> ns/op
>> test non-ascii String avgt 3 4642.667 ┬▒ 11481.029
>> ns/op
>> test non-ascii StringBuffer avgt 3 728.027 ┬▒ 936.521
>> ns/op
>>
>>
>> jdk 25
>> Benchmark (data) (source) Mode Cnt Score Error Units
>> test ascii String avgt 3 1184.513 ┬▒ 2057.498
>> ns/op
>> test ascii StringBuffer avgt 3 786.611 ┬▒ 411.657
>> ns/op
>> test non-ascii String avgt 3 4197.585 ┬▒ 2761.388
>> ns/op
>> test non-ascii StringBuffer avgt 3 716.375 ┬▒ 815.349
>> ns/op
>>
>>
>> jdk 26
>> Benchmark (data) (source) Mode Cnt Score Error Units
>> test ascii String avgt 3 1107.207 ┬▒ 423.072
>> ns/op
>> test ascii StringBuffer avgt 3 742.780 ┬▒ 178.890
>> ns/op
>> test non-ascii String avgt 3 4043.914 ┬▒ 498.439
>> ns/op
>> test non-ascii StringBuffer avgt 3 712.535 ┬▒ 583.255
>> ns/op
>>
>>
>> On Sat, Jul 19, 2025 at 4:17 PM Chen Liang
>> <liangchenblue at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Without looking at C2 IRs, I think there are a few potential
>> culprits we can look into:
>> 1. JDK-8351000 and JDK-8351443 updated StringBuilder
>> 2. Sequence field is read in the loop; I wonder if making it
>> an explicit immutable local variable changes anything here.
>>
>> On Sat, Jul 19, 2025 at 2:34 PM Brett Okken
>> <brett.okken.os at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> I was looking at the performance of StringCharBuffer for
>> various
>> backing CharSequence types and was surprised to see a
>> significant
>> performance difference between String and StringBuffer. I
>> wrote a
>> small jmh which shows that the String implementation of
>> charAt is
>> significantly slower than StringBuilder. Is this expected?
>>
>> Benchmark (data) (source)
>> Mode Cnt
>> Score Error Units
>> CharSequenceCharAtBenchmark.test ascii String
>> avgt 3
>> 2537.311 ┬▒ 8952.197 ns/op
>> CharSequenceCharAtBenchmark.test ascii StringBuffer
>> avgt 3
>> 852.004 ┬▒ 2532.958 ns/op
>> CharSequenceCharAtBenchmark.test non-ascii String
>> avgt 3
>> 5115.381 ┬▒ 13822.592 ns/op
>> CharSequenceCharAtBenchmark.test non-ascii StringBuffer
>> avgt 3
>> 836.230 ┬▒ 1154.191 ns/op
>>
>>
>>
>> @Measurement(iterations = 3, time = 5, timeUnit =
>> TimeUnit.SECONDS)
>> @Warmup(iterations = 2, time = 7, timeUnit =
>> TimeUnit.SECONDS)
>> @BenchmarkMode(Mode.AverageTime)
>> @OutputTimeUnit(TimeUnit.NANOSECONDS)
>> @State(Scope.Benchmark)
>> @Fork(value = 1, jvmArgsPrepend = {"-Xms512M", "-Xmx512M"})
>> public class CharSequenceCharAtBenchmark {
>>
>> @Param(value = {"ascii", "non-ascii"})
>> public String data;
>>
>> @Param(value = {"String", "StringBuffer"})
>> public String source;
>>
>> private CharSequence sequence;
>>
>> @Setup(Level.Trial)
>> public void setup() throws Exception {
>> StringBuilder sb = new StringBuilder(3152);
>> for (int i=0; i<3152; ++i) {
>> char c = (char) i;
>> if ("ascii".equals(data)) {
>> c = (char) (i & 0x7f);
>> }
>> sb.append(c);
>> }
>>
>> switch(source) {
>> case "String":
>> sequence = sb.toString();
>> break;
>> case "StringBuffer":
>> sequence = sb;
>> break;
>> default:
>> throw new IllegalArgumentException(source);
>> }
>> }
>>
>> @Benchmark
>> public int test() {
>> int sum = 0;
>> for (int i=0, j=sequence.length(); i<j; ++i) {
>> sum += sequence.charAt(i);
>> }
>> return sum;
>> }
>> }
>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mail.openjdk.org/pipermail/core-libs-dev/attachments/20250721/b89346f1/attachment-0001.htm>
More information about the core-libs-dev
mailing list