垃圾收集是Java#不能用于实时系统的主要原因。

GC什么时候会发生? 需要多长时间?

这是不确定的。

在一个特殊的场景中，c++仍然占据上风(并且将在未来几年占据上风)，即可以在编译时预先确定多态决策。

通常，封装和延迟决策是一件好事，因为它使代码更加动态，更容易适应不断变化的需求，并且更容易作为框架使用。这就是为什么在c#中面向对象编程是非常高效的，并且它可以在术语“泛化”下泛化。不幸的是，这种特殊的泛化在运行时是有代价的。

Usually, this cost is non-substantial but there are applications where the overhead of virtual method calls and object creation can make a difference (especially since virtual methods prevent other optimizations such as method call inlining). This is where C++ has a huge advantage because you can use templates to achieve a different kind of generalization which has no impact on runtime but isn't necessarily any less polymorphic than OOP. In fact, all of the mechanisms that constitute OOP can be modelled using only template techniques and compile-time resolution.

在这种情况下(不可否认，它们通常局限于特殊的问题领域)，c++胜过c#和类似的语言。

C/ c++在有大型数组或数组(任何大小)上的大量循环/迭代的程序中可以表现得更好。这就是为什么在C/ c++中图形化通常要快得多，因为几乎所有的图形化操作都基于繁重的数组操作。net在数组索引操作中是出了名的慢，这是由于所有的安全检查，这对于多维数组尤其如此(是的，矩形c#数组甚至比锯齿形c#数组还要慢)。

The bonuses of C/C++ are most pronounced if you stick directly with pointers and avoid Boost, std::vector and other high-level containers, as well as inline every small function possible. Use old-school arrays whenever possible. Yes, you will need more lines of code to accomplish the same thing you did in Java or C# as you avoid high-level containers. If you need a dynamically sized array, you will just need to remember to pair your new T[] with a corresponding delete[] statement (or use std::unique_ptr)—the price for the extra speed is that you must code more carefully. But in exchange, you get to rid yourself of the overhead of managed memory / garbage collector, which can easily be 20% or more of the execution time of heavily object-oriented programs in both Java and .NET, as well as those massive managed memory array indexing costs. C++ apps can also benefit from some nifty compiler switches in certain specific cases.

I am an expert programmer in C, C++, Java, and C#. I recently had the rare occasion to implement the exact same algorithmic program in the latter 3 languages. The program had a lot of math and multi-dimensional array operations. I heavily optimized this in all 3 languages. The results were typical of what I normally see in less rigorous comparisons: Java was about 1.3x faster than C# (most JVMs are more optimized than the CLR), and the C++ raw pointer version came in about 2.1x faster than C#. Note that the C# program only used safe code—it is my opinion that you might as well code it in C++ before using the unsafe keyword.

Lest anyone think I have something against C#, I will close by saying that C# is probably my favorite language. It is the most logical, intuitive and rapid development language I've encountered so far. I do all my prototyping in C#. The C# language has many small, subtle advantages over Java (yes, I know Microsoft had the chance to fix many of Java's shortcomings by entering the game late and arguably copying Java). Toast to Java's Calendar class anyone? If Microsoft ever spends real effort to optimize the CLR and the .NET JITter, C# could seriously take over. I'm honestly surprised they haven't already—they did so many things right in the C# language, why not follow it up with heavy-hitting compiler optimizations? Maybe if we all beg.

通常，这取决于应用程序。在某些情况下，c#可能慢得可以忽略不计，而在其他情况下，c++要快5到10倍，特别是在操作可以轻松SIMD的情况下。

没有严格的理由说明为什么基于字节码的语言(如c#或Java)不能像c++代码一样快。然而，c++代码在很长一段时间内都要快得多，今天在许多情况下仍然如此。这主要是因为更高级的JIT优化实现起来比较复杂，而真正酷的JIT优化现在才出现。

所以在很多情况下，c++更快。但这只是答案的一部分。c++实际上更快的情况是高度优化的程序，其中专业程序员彻底优化了代码。这不仅非常耗时(因此非常昂贵)，而且由于过度优化通常会导致错误。

On the other hand, code in interpreted languages gets faster in later versions of the runtime (.NET CLR or Java VM), without you doing anything. And there are a lot of useful optimizations JIT compilers can do that are simply impossible in languages with pointers. Also, some argue that garbage collection should generally be as fast or faster as manual memory management, and in many cases it is. You can generally implement and achieve all of this in C++ or C, but it's going to be much more complicated and error prone.

As Donald Knuth said, "premature optimization is the root of all evil". If you really know for sure that your application will mostly consist of very performance critical arithmetic, and that it will be the bottleneck, and it's certainly going to be faster in C++, and you're sure that C++ won't conflict with your other requirements, go for C++. In any other case, concentrate on first implementing your application correctly in whatever language suits you best, then find performance bottlenecks if it runs too slow, and then think about how to optimize the code. In the worst case, you might need to call out to C code through a foreign function interface, so you'll still have the ability to write critical parts in lower level language.

请记住，优化一个正确的程序相对容易，但更正一个优化的程序要难得多。

给出实际的速度优势百分比是不可能的，这在很大程度上取决于你的代码。在许多情况下，编程语言实现甚至不是瓶颈。请带着极大的怀疑态度使用http://benchmarksgame.alioth.debian.org/上的基准测试，因为这些测试的主要是算术代码，很可能与您的代码完全不同。

c++(或C)为您提供了对数据结构的细粒度控制。如果你想玩，你有这个选择。大型托管Java或。net应用程序(OWB, Visual Studio 2005)，它们使用Java/。NET库自带包袱。我曾见过OWB设计会话使用超过400 MB的RAM，立方体或ETL设计的bid也达到100 MB。

在可预测的工作负载上(例如重复一个过程多次的大多数基准测试)，JIT可以为您提供优化得足够好的代码，没有实际差别。

在大型应用程序上，差异与其说是JIT，不如说是代码本身使用的数据结构。当应用程序的内存很重时，您将获得较低的缓存使用效率。在现代cpu上，缓存丢失是非常昂贵的。C或c++的真正优势在于，您可以优化数据结构的使用，从而更好地使用CPU缓存。