与其说C的速度快，不如说C的成本模型是透明的。如果一个C程序慢，它的慢是通过一个明显的方式:执行很多语句。与C语言中操作的代价相比，对对象(特别是反射)或字符串的高级操作可能具有不明显的代价。

标准ML(使用MLton编译器)和Objective Caml这两种语言通常编译成二进制文件的速度与C语言一样快。如果你检查一下基准测试游戏，你会发现对于一些基准测试，比如二叉树，OCaml版本比c更快(我没有找到任何MLton的条目)。但不要把枪战看得太严重;正如它所说的，它是一个游戏，结果通常反映了人们在调优代码上投入了多少精力。

c++的平均速度更快(就像它最初一样，主要是C的超集，尽管有一些不同)。然而，对于特定的基准测试，通常有另一种更快的语言。

https://benchmarksgame-team.pages.debian.net/benchmarksgame/

fannjuch-redux是Scala中最快的

n-body和fasta在Ada中更快。

频谱范数在Fortran中是最快的。

反补、mandelbrot和pidigits在ATS中最快。

regex-dna是JavaScript中最快的。

chameneau -redux最快的是Java 7。

Haskell的螺纹环速度最快。

其余的基准测试在C或c++中是最快的。

我认为没有人提到这样一个事实，即在C编译器上投入的精力比任何其他编译器都要多，也许Java是例外。

由于前面提到的许多原因，C是非常可优化的——几乎比任何其他语言都要多。因此，如果在其他语言编译器上投入同样的精力，C可能仍然会名列前茅。

I think there is at least one candidate language that with effort could be optimized better than C and thus we could see implementations that produce faster binaries. I'm thinking of digital mars D because the creator took care to build a language that could potentially be better optimized than C. There may be other languages that have this possibility. However I cannot imagine that any language will have compilers more than just a few percent faster than the best C compilers. I would love to be wrong.

我认为真正的“唾手可得的果实”将是那些被设计为易于人类优化的语言。一个熟练的程序员可以让任何语言运行得更快——但有时你不得不做一些荒谬的事情或使用不自然的结构来实现这一点。尽管这总是需要付出努力，但一种好的语言应该产生相对快速的代码，而不必纠结于程序究竟是如何编写的。

It's also important (at least to me) that the worst case code tends to be fast. There are numerous "proofs" on the web that Java is as fast or faster than C, but that is based on cherry picking examples. I'm not big fan of C, but I know that ANYTHING I write in C is going to run well. With Java it will "probably" run within 15% of the speed, usually within 25% but in some cases it can be far worse. Any cases where it's just as fast or within a couple of percent are usually due to most of the time being spent in the library code which is heavily optimized C anyway.

这不是语言的问题，而是工具和库的问题。C语言可用的库和编译器比新语言要老得多。你可能认为这会让它们变慢，但事实恰恰相反。

这些库是在处理能力和内存非常重要的时候编写的。它们必须写得非常高效，才能发挥作用。C编译器的开发人员也花了很长时间为不同的处理器进行各种巧妙的优化。C语言的成熟和广泛采用使得它比同时期的其他语言具有显著的优势。它还使C语言在速度上比那些不像C语言那样强调原始性能的新工具更有优势。

1)正如其他人所说，C为你做的更少。没有初始化变量，没有数组边界检查，没有内存管理等。其他语言中的这些特性会消耗C语言不需要的内存和CPU周期。

2) Answers saying that C is less abstracted and therefore faster are only half correct I think. Technically speaking, if you had a "sufficiently advanced compiler" for language X, then language X could approach or equal the speed of C. The difference with C is that since it maps so obviously (if you've taken an architecture course) and directly to assembly language that even a naive compiler can do a decent job. For something like Python, you need a very advanced compiler to predict the probable types of objects and generate machine code on the fly -- C's semantics are simple enough that a simple compiler can do well.

甚至C和c++之间的差异有时也会很大。

当你为一个对象分配内存，调用构造函数，在字边界上对齐内存等等，程序最终会经历很多开销，这些开销都是从程序员那里抽象出来的。

C迫使您查看程序所做的每一件事，通常是非常精细的细节。这使得编写执行大量与当前目标无关的任务的代码变得更加困难(尽管并非完全不可能)。

因此，例如在BASIC程序中，你可以使用INPUT关键字从STDIN读取字符串并自动为其变量分配内存，在C中，程序员通常已经分配了内存，并可以控制诸如程序是否阻塞I/O，以及它是否在获得所需信息后停止读取输入或继续读取字符到行尾等事情。

C also performs a lot less error-checking than other languages, presuming the programmer knows what they're doing. So whereas in PHP if you declare a string $myStr = getInput(); and go on to reference $myStr[20], but the input was only 10 characters long, PHP will catch this and safely return to you a blank string. C assumes that you've either allocated enough memory to hold data past the end of the string or that you know what information comes after the string and are trying to reference that instead. These small factors have a huge impact on overhead in aggregate.