Was inspired by Ayende post (see http://ayende.com/Blog/archive/2011/04/14/performance-numbers-in-the-pub.aspx) and want to check how much objects my work PC may create 
Moreover, now seems best time to do that – my company order today new SUPER machines for our team, so it will be interesting to see difference with current PC using such “.NET” test.
My current PC is Intel Q8200 4 Cores / 8Gb memory / SSD Intel 80Gb etc – you get idea 
Main difference between my code and Ayende code (as well as many blog comments code) is that I create objects using multiple threads. What is interesting for me that most of people even today, just forget the fact that they have multiple cores in PC (or Server) and modern development should be done with that “stick” idea in your mind: “multitask / multithreading / async may be used if you want to utilize optimally your hardware”. Sure it’s not always make sense to go that “hard way” – some tasks just not scale too much with that approach. At the same time, in that specific tests I was able to get about 50% performance gain using very simple threading model compared to the single threaded. Not bad enough, right?
Sure it’s not really optimal strategy (more optimal for sure to just use C / C++) and I think memory speed restrict CPU power in that specific tests (i.e. no matter how many cores you use in CPU, if your memory / memory controller just can’t get / process all that in the parallel). In addition I also initialize each created object integer field with some value to restrict some possible optimizations in CLI. You can also found multiple small optimizations to avoid some overhead etc. Sure it’s not best code out there, but effective enough to demonstrate how TPL can improve results even in such a simple task. Maybe later will found time and write same using C++ with Parallel Patterns Library (PPL) to measure the difference
On my PC test create 4 new threads and each thread create multiple objects. Note that test works 10 seconds to give you more precise results
Tests results: around 150M created and initialized objects per second (don’t forget to build in Release mode if you really want to run it)
I promise to publish new results when new PC arrive to our office;-)
Btw, if you get your own results, will be glad to see and compare
Stay tuned
P.S. Code is not finally optimized and is not “production ready”. Means that I just want to play a bit with what Ayende originally wrote…
For example, you probably may note that test will take longer than 10 seconds to run if your PC already busy with some tasks (simply because I use too much threads for such environment) etc.
P.P.S. No warranties Please do not run that code on your production servers
Update #1: My colleague have notebook with Intel i5 CPU (4 Cores) and he just get 215M result
Update #2: Just get new PC with CPU Intel i7-2600K (at 3.5Ghz) / 8Gb DDR3 1600Mhz memory etc. I get just amazing result: 700M with same source code WOW!
using System;
using System.Collections.Generic;
using System.Diagnostics;
using System.Threading;
using System.Threading.Tasks;
using System.Timers;
namespace Testing
{
class Program
{
static volatile bool _isContinue = true;
static long _total;
const int TestTimeSec = 10000;
static Stopwatch _sp;
static void Main(string[] args)
{
var tasks = new List<Task>();
int processors = Environment.ProcessorCount;
Console.WriteLine("Detected {0} cores", processors);
var timer = new System.Timers.Timer(TestTimeSec);
timer.Elapsed += TimerElapsed;
timer.AutoReset = false;
timer.Start();
_sp = Stopwatch.StartNew();
for (int t = 0; t < processors; t++)
{
tasks.Add(Task.Factory.StartNew(
() =>
{
long i = 0;
while (_isContinue)
{
var obj = new MyClass();
i++;
obj.B = i;
}
Interlocked.Add(ref _total, i);
}
));
}
// let's complete all the tasks to get results into _total
Task.WaitAll(tasks.ToArray());
_sp.Stop();
Console.WriteLine("Created {0} objects in {1}", _total / 10, _sp.Elapsed.TotalMilliseconds / 10);
Console.ReadKey();
}
static void TimerElapsed(object sender, ElapsedEventArgs e)
{
_isContinue = false;
Console.WriteLine("Stopping...");
}
public class MyClass
{
public string A;
public long B;
public DateTime C;
}
}
}
