http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56630
--- Comment #2 from Markus Trippelsdorf <markus at trippelsdorf dot de> 2013-03-16 10:30:51 UTC --- Looks like the sorting of a std::list container is mostly responsible: 168 list<element_t> container(first, last); 169 container.sort(); When I run just with size 10 I get: markus@x4 ~ % c++ -O2 -fsanitize=address bench.cpp markus@x4 ~ % time ./mem ./a.out size array vector with pointers vector with iterators deque 10 0.47 0.48 0.54 1.06 list set multiset 13.69(!) 2.41 3.97 ./mem ./a.out 21.80s user 0.99s system 99% cpu 22.791 total peak=2736348 Without the list test I get a reasonable result: (238 // run(list_test, buffer, buffer_end, n);) markus@x4 ~ % time ./mem ./a.out size array vector with pointers vector with iterators 10 0.46 0.47 0.5 deque set multiset 1.03 1.93 3.71 ./mem ./a.out 7.67s user 0.56s system 99% cpu 8.245 total markus@x4 ~ % memusg: peak=1415416 For comparison clang: markus@x4 ~ % clang++ -O2 -fsanitize=address bench.cpp markus@x4 ~ % time ./mem ./a.out size array vector with pointers vector with iterators deque 10 0.42 0.41 0.42 0.96 list set multiset 5.73 2.93 5.69 ./mem ./a.out 16.52s user 0.10s system 99% cpu 16.627 total markus@x4 ~ % memusg: peak=229660
