Skip to content
Open
Changes from all commits
Commits
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension

Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
47 changes: 47 additions & 0 deletions BENCHMARKS.md
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
@@ -0,0 +1,47 @@
## python-build-standalone performance

<img
width="1820" height="1730"
alt="Shows a chart with violin plots with benchmark results"
src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/5499f9ce-ee02-4485-baa2-9d982fe457e6"
/>
Comment on lines +3 to +7

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

should we include the raw data too, not just the image?


python-build-standalone provides high-performance CPython distributions designed for compatibility across a broad range of Linux distributions, macOS releases, and Windows versions. It's builds incorporate compiler optimizations such as profile-guided optimization (PGO), link-time optimization (LTO), and, where appropriate, BOLT post-link binary optimization. Together, these techniques improve runtime performance while preserving portability.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

nit: I feel like this might be appropriate for a blog post, but when you're already in astral-sh/python-build-standalone/blob/main/BENCHMARKS.md this doesn't add too much value. At the very least it's out of place, sitting below the chart. I'd start immediately with the "The figure above" paragraph

Benchmarks using the pyperformance suite show that python-build-standalone performs competitively with, and frequently outperforms, other widely used CPython distributions.


### Figure details

The figure above compares CPython 3.14.6 performance across several distributions using pyperformance. Each violin represents the distribution of per-benchmark mean runtime ratios between an alternative CPython distribution and python-build-standalone on the same platform and architecture. Ratios greater than 1 indicate that python-build-standalone was faster; ratios less than 1 indicate that the alternative distribution was faster.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

maybe smuggle a link to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Violin_plot ? I wasn't familiar with this until I looked it up


The horizontal axis uses a logarithmic scale. The vertical marker within each violin indicates the geometric mean of the runtime ratios, which is also expressed as a percentage beside each distribution.

From top to bottom, the distributions shown are:
* The Docker `python:3.14` image for x86-64, providing CPython 3.14.6.
* A conda-forge Python 3.14.6 environment for `linux-64`.
* The system Python 3.14.6 in a `fedora:44` x86-64 Docker container.
* The system Python 3.14.6 in a debian:forky x86-64 Docker container.
* CPython 3.14.6 from the Python.org macOS installer on an arm64 Mac.
* A conda-forge Python 3.14.6 environment for `osx-arm64`.
* CPython 3.14.6 installed through Homebrew on an arm64 Mac.
* CPython 3.14.6 from the Python.org Windows installer for x86-64.
* A conda-forge Python 3.14.6 environment for `win-64`.
Comment on lines +19 to +28

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

should we include more precise versions that will allow people to reproduce the benchmark? e.g. the docker image hash, or the link to the python.org macos installer


The reference interpreter for each comparison was the corresponding platform- and architecture-matched python-build-standalone CPython 3.14.6 distribution from the [`20260623` release](https://github.com/astral-sh/python-build-standalone/releases#release-20260623), installed using `uv`.

Benchmarks were run in early to mid-July 2026 and reflect the distributions and packages available during that period.

### Benchmark methodology

Benchmarks were executed from a virtual environment created with the reference interpreter into which pyperformance 1.14.0 was installed. Results were collected using:
``` shell
pyperformance run --rigorous --warmups 2 --output <logfile>
```

The complete benchmark suite was run at least twice to assess consistency.

Linux benchmarks were run inside Docker containers on an Ubuntu 24.04 host with an Intel Core i9-9900K processor. Hyper-Threading and Intel SpeedStep were disabled.

macOS benchmarks were run on a MacBook Pro with an Apple M5 Max processor.

Windows benchmarks were run on a Windows 11 host with an Intel Core i5-9500 processor. Intel Turbo Boost was disabled; this processor does not support Hyper-Threading.