Looking at the source code, is the random value generated before the main loop iterations to stop the compiler from shortcutting all the iterations? Does that work on some of the better compilers out there? The random value is only generated once. I would like to see a similar benchmark on creating/destroying objects in memory.

If you are interested in looking into the details of microbenchmarks of this type, there is always https://benchmarksgame-team.pages.debian.net/benchmarksgame/... which has clearly defined methodology and allows to understand wall-clock time vs CPU cost too.

The benchmark code linked in the submission unfortunately suffers from the mistakes that happen whenever you write a benchmark for the first time. The visuals are pretty but might as well have been based on something more comprehensive.

(also, please stop measuring performance with loops that perform no work and fibonacci sequences, this was bad 30 years ago, this is bad today too)

Yeah, the random value prevents compile-time pre-calculation and the print makes sure the loops actually get run and values actually get calculated (as modern compilers are wont to simply omit code that clearly doesn't have consequence).