Performance of Interlocked.Increment

.net performance interlocked interlocked-increment
SLaks picture SLaks · Jun 23, 2009 · Viewed 15.7k times · Source

Is Interlocked.Increment(ref x) faster or slower than x++ for ints and longs on various platforms?

Answer

Michael picture Michael · Jun 23, 2009

It is slower since it forces the action to occur atomically and it acts as a memory barrier, eliminating the processor's ability to re-order memory accesses around the instruction.

You should be using Interlocked.Increment when you want the action to be atomic on state that can be shared between threads - it's not intended to be a full replacement for x++.

Related questions

Best way to reverse a string

I've just had to write a string reverse function in C# 2.0 (i.e. LINQ not available) and came up with this: public string Reverse(string text) { char[] cArray = text.ToCharArray(); string reverse = String.Empty; for (int i = cArray.Length - 1; …

Read More
How to create a new object instance from a Type

One may not always know the Type of an object at compile-time, but may need to create an instance of the Type. How do you get a new object instance from a Type?

Read More
What's the fastest way to read a text file line-by-line?

I want to read a text file line by line. I wanted to know if I'm doing it as efficiently as possible within the .NET C# scope of things. This is what I'm trying so far: var filestream = new System.…

Read More