On 28.04.2011, at 17:52, Ben Coman wrote:

> hi all,
> 
> Last month as an introduction to Squeak I did some performance testing for the creation of morphs, and a comparison between derivatives of Squeak.  An advance copy of one of the graphs was posted previously, but I have since updated the graphs and discussion based on feedback at that time.  I was going to tweak them some more but have been distracted by other priorities, and so I thought I would just post them now.  I hope they are of some interest.  I'll look at updating the graphs later, unless someone beats me too it in the comments.
> 
> http://blog.openinworld.com/2011/03/morphic-performance/
> http://blog.openinworld.com/2011/03/morphic-flavour-performance/
> http://blog.openinworld.com/2011/04/performance-testing-spreadsheet/
> 
> Its my first go at a blog (I hear all the cool kids are doin' it) - so any and all feedback on style and content is welcome.
> 
> Cheers, Ben

Nice work. However, the VM (Interpreter or Cog) is independent of the image (Squeak / Cuis / Pharo). To get comparable results you should run either image on both VMs (or, since you just care about performance, use Cog for all three).

- Bert -