A Snapshot of the Performance of Wasm Backends for Managed Languages
summary
Compares six managed-language Wasm backends to their native counterparts and to each other, reporting concrete slowdowns: the best backends average 1.4× slower than native, some backends exceed 8× slowdown, and Bigloo-compiled code sits around 1.5–2× native. Measures effects of choices: generating Wasm without the relooper optimization roughly doubles cost, using V8’s unsafe mode gives ~30% speedup at crash risk, and double runtime type checks and missing stack ops remain practical limitations.
AI-written summary · about
chapters (6)
- 0:00WebAssembly intro
- 6:46Managed language performance
- 13:28Wasm compilation strategies
- 17:18Wasm type safety limits
- 18:01Wasm potential final thoughts
- 20:12Q&A benchmarks & startup
related talks
20mNot So Fast: Analyzing the Performance of WebAssembly vs. Native Code
34mPanel Discussion: Browsers & Wasm
46mWhat to Use Today for WebAssembly?
29mNew Adventures for WASM
35mBoost your JavaScript app
37mThe State of WebAssembly
21mHit the Ground Running with WebAssembly
32mWebAssembly vs JavaScript: Which Is Faster?
