Ask Ubuntu is a question and answer site for Ubuntu users and developers. It's 100% free.

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

I've been using WINE coupled with .NET for ages to run .NET applications, but I recently found out about Mono, a cross-platform, open source version of the .NET framework.

I was wondering: since Mono is native and WINE is a sort of "emulator", does that mean that Mono will be faster and/or better at running .NET applications?

share|improve this question
Wine Is Not an Emulator. It implements Windows API Functions natively under linux, often running faster than on Windows. So, I would expect very similar performance but of course your mileage may vary depending on the underlying system and depending on the implementation of the runtime engine. – Floyd Jan 6 '13 at 14:35
Yes, mono is comparatively faster. But you can't run .net apps using mono without rebuilding – Tachyons Jan 6 '13 at 14:36
@Tachyons - actually .net assemblies do not need to be recompiled to run on mono, the assembly format is an open standard – trampster Jan 7 '13 at 4:07
I have been doing .NET development for long time, and from 2013 had the need to move many projects to mono due to cheapest hosting. What I've found best is stick to the standard libraries, develop in windows using Visual Studio IDE and deploy executable, dll's and dependencies on linux. Once deployed run as many tests as possible so you can rest asured it all works on both platfforms. 99% of the times this method just works with .NET 4, but I have found some issues on certain complex projects, especially those which make intensive use of reflection. Performace you're asking? Linux all the way. – mau Apr 3 '14 at 22:31

See this benchmark.

Mono can sometimes run faster than .NET, and faster than native compiled code. However, Mono may not include all the .NET platform libs features. Starting version 5 it seems to include all of the C# features.

share|improve this answer
It looks like this paper is from 2006, which I think means that it has little relevance today. This discussion is also not up-to-date (from 2010), but at least contains some relevant information. – bluenote10 Aug 11 '15 at 8:56

Your Answer


By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.