Does using small datatypes (for example short instead of int) reduce memory usage?

Question

My question is basically about how the C# compiler handles memory allocation of small datatypes. I do know that for example operators like add are defined on int and not on short and thus computations will be executed as if the shorts are int members.

Assuming the following:

• There's no business logic/validation logic associated with the choice of short as a datatype
• We're not doing anything with unsafe code

Does using the short datatype wherever possible reduce the memory footprint of my application and is it advisable to do so? Or is using short and the like not worth the effort as the compiler allocates the full memory ammount of a int32 for example and adds additional casts when doing arithmetic.

Any links on the supposed runtime performance impact would be greatly appreciated.

Related questions:

Why should I use int instead of a byte or short in C#

Integer summing blues, short += short problem

Answer 1

From a memory-only perspective, using short instead of int will be better. The simple reason is that a short variable needs only half the size of an int variable in memory. The CLR does not expand short to int in memory.

Nevertheless this reduced memory consumption might and probably will decrease runtime performance of your application significantly. All modern CPUs do perform much better with 32bit numbers than with 16bit numbers. Additionally in many cases the CLR will have to convert between short and int when e.g. calling methods that take int arguments. There are many other performance considerations you have to take before going this way.

I would only change this at very dedicated locations and modules of your application and only if you really encounter measurable memory shortages.

In some cases you can of course switch from int to short easily without hurting performance. One example is a giant array of ints all of which do also fit to shorts.