Performance Myths

Performance Tuning
#21

Okay, time to un-lurk for a moment. I see a lot of programmers complain about the preception of Java performance, especially as it relates to games. They talk about a mass misconeption of java performance in nearly paranoid, Oliver Stone-like terms.

I don’t really see the point. Talk will convert no one. The Java Game that will change people’s mind isn’t here, and for the moment isn’t even on the radar. Until someone does something outstanding, and of commercial quality deailing with negative vibes won’t go away.

As an abstract, Quake3 now runs over 200 FPS on my computer. Even if Java runs half as fast as C++ (which we all know is bogus), shouldn’t a Java version of the game give me 100 FPS? I wish somebody could show me this.

#22

[quote]Unfortunately there are still enough cases where Java is still slow to sustain the belief that it is slow in general. It doesn’t help that products like NetBeans are rather optimistic with their minimum machine specification (notably with regard to available memory).
[/quote]
Yes, you have a point there. Swing apps seem less responsive and memory hungry than native windows apps.

[quote]Okay, time to un-lurk for a moment. I see a lot of programmers complain about the preception of Java performance, especially as it relates to games. They talk about a mass misconeption of java performance in nearly paranoid, Oliver Stone-like terms.

I don’t really see the point. Talk will convert no one.

The Java Game that will change people’s mind isn’t here, and for the moment isn’t even on the radar. Until someone does something outstanding, and of commercial quality deailing with negative vibes won’t go away.

As an abstract, Quake3 now runs over 200 FPS on my computer. Even if Java runs half as fast as C++ (which we all know is bogus), shouldn’t a Java version of the game give me 100 FPS? I wish somebody could show me this.
[/quote]
I agree that java needs a real showcase to change people’s minds, but you really need to back up your statements regarding regarding java’s performance compared to C++. Now you’re just hanging on to the myths and nothing more.

Erik

#23

[quote]…but you really need to back up your statements regarding regarding java’s performance compared to C++. Now you’re just hanging on to the myths and nothing more.
[/quote]
No, I don’t. That’s the point, I’m not wasiting my breath trying to convince people of something they do not want to believe.

#24

Well, I was talking about real life situations where customers point to java as the source of their performance troubles. In every case these customers were proven wrong and java was never a bottleneck. This was not just based on words but on hard numbers. I didn’t want to convince them, I simply had to, which can be annoying and a waste of time.

What I don’t understand is that you ‘unlurk’ with [quote]which we all know is bogus
[/quote]
statements, but don’t care to back them up because you’re [quote]not wasiting my breath trying to convince people of something they do not want to believe
[/quote]
.
This doesn’t seem very constructive.

Erik

#25

[quote]The Java Game that will change people’s mind isn’t here, and for the moment isn’t even on the radar. Until someone does something outstanding, and of commercial quality deailing with negative vibes won’t go away.
[/quote]
Why would someone who can create this kind of game use a language that won’t let them port the game to consoles?

#26

Hm, didn’t we rant about the console thing 2 years ago?

Cas :slight_smile:

#27

Yes we did, but as long as the problem remains it’s useless to dream of the kind of games that EvilJohn described. Sure, DukeNukemForever might have been out by now if 3DRealms had written it in Java, but they will probably never use Java as long as they have to rewrite the game in C++ for the PS2.

The best we can really hope for from the big-budget companies is a MMORPG (if that genre does not work out on consoles, something that I imagine might happen) or a high-performance niche game like IL-2 Sturmovik, but neither is likely to have top-FPS-quality graphics.

#28

There’s no solid reason we can’t have a JVM on PS2 developed by a 3rd party developer. Nor is there a good reason we can’t have OpenGL drivers on it. And there’s no reason the LWJGL can’t be ported to run on them, giving you instant portability…

…except that I came to the conclusion that Sony-san does not want this to happen to PS it would devalue the whole product by diluting its exclusivity. How do you control franchise licensing for a Java title? How is Sony-san going to extract his yen from Alien Flux?

The conclusion we came to (and again, more recently in an interview with Java Developers Journal) runs something like this:

Me: Sony don’t need a JVM in reality because it loosens their grip on the PS franchise.

JeffK: Oh no it doesn’t

Me: Oh yes it does

ad absurdum in the face of absolutely no evidence either way!

But to throw a small spanner in the performance myths works here: unfortunately on every platform that isn’t a desktop computer of some sort, Java performance is largely pitiful. I use CrEme on an iPaq - it’s got a 200MHz ARM processor in it: it’s fast but somehow CrEme manages to run far slower than the slowest of slow things. And all those little tricks like putting final everywhere and not calling interface methods unfortunately work. But it’s still too damned slow to run a game on it. I could port LWJGL to CrEme really easily (once we put the 2D API together) but there’s no point yet because the performance is abysmal. That’s where your Java performance problems are. And you can bet if someone ports a JVM to Playstation that it’ll be a big pile of slow shite that is shunned by Playstation developers. I’ll put a fiver on it if anyone cares to bet me.

Cas :slight_smile:

#29

[quote]… And you can bet if someone ports a JVM to Playstation that it’ll be a big pile of slow shite that is shunned by Playstation developers. I’ll put a fiver on it if anyone cares to bet me.
[/quote]
I’ll start a book; I’m offering odds of:

1-10: performance is acceptably good if it’s done by IBM or Sun officially
1000-1: IBM will do it officially
5-1: An enterprising intern in IBM’s Sony-partnering group will do it and release it as an alpha product
100-1: performance is good otherwise

…but I’m not honouring bets until I’ve had down payments from the first 100 peopl 8)

#30

I’d like to put 5 on “Sony doesn’t see Java as a viable contender and they are doing just fine as the way things are now, thank you”.

#31

Treasonous to say, but isn’t the xbox a more realistic contender for a decent JVM :o

#32

Technically, yes; politically, no.

You may or may not know, for example, the Nvidia hardware in the XBox was tested using OpenGL but switched to DirectX for all-too-familiar reasons. The Xbox will remain a thoroughly closed abomination owned by the devil for all time.

Cas :slight_smile:

#33

What I find humourous about that statement, Prince, is that all three of the current consoles are “thoroughly closed abomination owned by the devil for all time”. What would really be nice is if something like the Indema (Was that was it was called?) could ever get off the drawing board and into peoples homes. Then maybe we could get something running on them.

#34

[quote]What I find humourous about that statement, Prince, is that all three of the current consoles are “thoroughly closed abomination owned by the devil for all time”. What would really be nice is if something like the Indema (Was that was it was called?) could ever get off the drawing board and into peoples homes. Then maybe we could get something running on them.
[/quote]
So so true.

#35

[quote]]…except that I came to the conclusion that Sony-san does not want this to happen to PS it would devalue the whole product by diluting its exclusivity. How do you control franchise licensing for a Java title? How is Sony-san going to extract his yen from Alien Flux?

The conclusion we came to (and again, more recently in an interview with Java Developers Journal) runs something like this:

Me: Sony don’t need a JVM in reality because it loosens their grip on the PS franchise.

JeffK: Oh no it doesn’t
[/quote]
there are issues of both Sun and Sony confidentaility here I assume you already understand.

Given that i can tell you the following:

(1) There have been issues between Sun and Sony about a PS2 port.

(2) Opening the platform is NOT one of them. We presented them with a number of solutions to this problem ranging from the VM being destributed as licensed middleware to them actually owning the VM and encrypting the class files with a private key.

The important thing is that I am convinced thatw e convinced them that this wont open the box. (And any hopes that we would were wrong to begin with.)

(3) There are some technical issues I cannot discuss without violating my Sony NDA. They are tough but i believe solvable in the end. There are business issues which the business guys are workign on. The business relationship is actually pretty strong, as anyone who was at the third day of the game summit might surmise from the 8 PS2s we had playing games (just for fun.)

We still have not given up hope here and I’d encourage you not to either, but I’d also quickly say that at this stage I can’t promise what will show up when, if ever.

#36

The way forward out of this corporate deadlock can only come from a 3rd party and selling their JVM to developers already licensed to produce Playstation games. The consumer need never know or care about Java. It’s not exactly a winning situation for Sun but somebody’ll make some money out of it.

Cas :slight_smile:

#37

[quote]The way forward out of this corporate deadlock can only come from a 3rd party and selling their JVM to developers already licensed to produce Playstation games. The consumer need never know or care about Java. It’s not exactly a winning situation for Sun but somebody’ll make some money out of it.

Cas :slight_smile:
[/quote]
Absolutes are never absolutely right Cas. You know that :slight_smile:

Thats one solution. Its not a solution I can have any impact on, so I’m concentrating my efforts on the ones where I can.

JK

#38

[quote]I’d like to put 5 on “Sony doesn’t see Java as a viable contender and they are doing just fine as the way things are now, thank you”.
[/quote]
What are the odds? I think I want to cover that one :slight_smile:

JK

#39

I’d take that one as well. Considering the apparent jump in learning curve from std. console to next-gen console, and assuming the jump to the next-next-gen consoles may be even higher, it seems logical that Sony might look at development platforms that hide some of that complexity. Java seems an obvious choice.

I’m confident enough to put 5 down on Java appearing on the PS3… :wink:

#40

Well, I’d gladly GLADLY pay the $5 if that happens. ;D
Not to each of you mind you, you’ll have to split it.