I think a lot of the devil is in the details, especially when we look at NET8/NET10 and the various other 'boosts' they have added to code.

But also, as far as this article, it's noting a noting a more specific use case that is fairly 'real world'; Reading a file (I/O), doing some form of deserialization (likely with a library unless format is proprietary) and whatever 'generating a map' means.

Again, this all feels pretty realistic for a use case so it's good food for thought.

> Can someone explain what benchmarks were actually used?

This honestly would be useful in the article itself, as well as, per above, some 'deep dives' into where the performance issues were. Was it in file I/O (possibly Interop related?) Was it due to some pattern in the serialization library? Was it the object allocation pattern (When I think of C# code friendly for Mono I think of Cysharp libraries which sometimes do curious things)? Not diving deeper into the profiling doesn't help anyone know where the focus needs to be (unless it's a more general thing, in which case I'd hope for a better deep dive on that aspect.)

Edited to add:

Reading your article again, I wonder whether your compiler is just not doing the right things to take advantage of the performance boosts available via CoreCLR?

E.x. can you do things like stackalloc temp buffers to avoid allocation, and does the stdlib do those things where it is advantageous?

Also, I know I vaguely hit on this above, but also wondering whether the IL being done is just 'not hitting the pattern'. where a lot of CoreCLR will do it's best magic if things are arranged a specific way in IL based on how Roslyn outputs, but even for the 'expected' C# case, deviations can lead to breaking the opt.

What's going on with the Mandelbrot result in that post?

I don't beleive such a large regression from .NET framework to CoreCLR.