Tushar's Stock Tips: Mojo Vs Rust, Basic Test And Binary Perspective.

Hello, In first place I'm not going to do an algorithmic benchmark, just a simple loop + print test and some checks on the generated binaries.

The system is a Debian12 Linux and the architecture is: x86 64bits.

Rust

Mojo

Mojo don't allow .py extension it has to be .mojo so no default nvim highlighting ...

$ mojo build mojo_benchmark.mojo

$ time ./mojo_benchmark

...

real 0m0.342s

user 0m0.080s

sys 0m0.252s

$ rustc rust_benchmark.rs

$ time ./rust_benchmark

...

real 0m0.107s

user 0m0.012s

sys 0m0.049s

I noticed a speed increase using fish shell instead of bash but could be the environment variable stack overload.

So in this specific test rust is much faster. And also the compiler suggests using _ instead i, that mojo compiler doesn't.

The rust binary is bigger, but is because the allocator is embedded:

-rwxr-xr-x 1 sha0 sha0 1063352 Jan 10 08:55 mojo_benchmark

-rwxr-xr-x 1 sha0 sha0 4632872 Jan 10 08:57 rust_benchmark

But Look this, mojo uses libstdc++ and libc and rust only uses libc.

$ ldd -d mojo_benchmark

linux-vdso.so.1 (0x00007ffd94917000)

libtinfo.so.6 => /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libtinfo.so.6 (0x00007fe899cb1000)

libstdc++.so.6 => /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libstdc++.so.6 (0x00007fe899a00000)

libm.so.6 => /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libm.so.6 (0x00007fe899921000)

libgcc_s.so.1 => /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libgcc_s.so.1 (0x00007fe899c91000)

libc.so.6 => /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libc.so.6 (0x00007fe899740000)

/lib64/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2 (0x00007fe899d2c000)

$ ldd -d rust_benchmark

linux-vdso.so.1 (0x00007ffde67b7000)

libgcc_s.so.1 => /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libgcc_s.so.1 (0x00007f8b3881b000)

libc.so.6 => /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libc.so.6 (0x00007f8b3863a000)

/lib64/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2 (0x00007f8b388ae000)

Lets check the binary.

All the python non used built-ins are written to the binary, so does rust in this case.

mojo

rust

Steps until libc write:

Mojo

Rust

Ok wait, rustc like cargo by default is on debug-mode which is the slower version, the way to do cargo --release which is much faster is rustc -O rust_benchmark.rs

real 0m0.107s

user 0m0.005s

sys 0m0.056s

This simple program don't make profit of the optimizations.

Rust

We reduced from 30 calls to 27.

I'm not going to criticize the number of calls because rust does his magic and result faster.

Mojo only 7 calls but runtime seems slower.

Regarding memory operations, seems that is rust like compiler-time borrow checked.

https://docs.modular.com/mojo/programming-manual.html#behavior-of-destructors

Rust decompiled

Rust disassembled

Mojo decompiled

Mojo disassembled

So we have two things: the crafted assembly speed, and specially the runtime speed.

Looking the Rust assembly, it's writing the string pointer to stack on every iteration which is same pointer in every iteration.

However Mojo loop is more optimized, param and address to call are pre-calculated before the loop.

So Mojo is generating optimized code, but its c++ API seems slower, at least the print()

Regards.

Related news

Disclaimer

This Document is subject to changes without prior notice and is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed to and may contain confidential and/or privileged material and is not for any type of circulation. Any review, retransmission, or any other use is prohibited. Kindly note that this document does not constitute an offer or solicitation for the purchase or sale of any financial instrument or as an official confirmation of any transaction.

The information contained herein is from publicly available data or other sources believed to be reliable. While I would endeavour to update the information herein on reasonable basis, I am under no obligation to update or keep the information current. Also, there may be regulatory, compliance, or other reasons that may prevent me from doing so. I do not represent that information contained herein is accurate or complete and it should not be relied upon as such. This document is prepared for assistance only and is not intended to be and must not alone betaken as the basis for an investment decision. The user assumes the entire risk of any use made of this information. Each recipient of this document should make such investigations as it deems necessary to arrive at an independent evaluation of an investment in the securities of companies referred to in this document (including the merits and risks involved), and should consult its own advisors to determine the merits and risks of such an investment. The investment discussed or views expressed may not be suitable for all investors. I do not undertake to advise you as to any change of my views. I may have issued other reports that are inconsistent with and reach different conclusion from the information presented in this report. This report is not directed or intended for distribution to, or use by, any person or entity who is a citizen or resident of or located in any locality, state, country or other jurisdiction, where such distribution, publication, availability or use would be contrary to law, regulation or which would subject me to any registration or licensing requirement within such jurisdiction. The securities described herein may or may not be eligible for sale in all jurisdictions or to certain category of investors. Persons in whose possession this document may come are required to inform themselves of and to observe such restriction. I may have used the information set forth herein before publication and may have positions in, may from time to time purchase or sell or may be materially interested in any of the securities mentioned or related securities. I may from time to time solicit from, or perform investment banking, or other services for, any company mentioned herein. Without limiting any of the foregoing, in no event shall I or any third party involved in, or related to, computing or compiling the information have any liability for any damages of any kind.