Do you have a feeling for the accurancy in those figures? Are the results significant to the last digit?
/ Martin Stjernholm, Roxen IS
Previous text:
2003-01-27 12:35: Subject: INT_TYPE = INT64
Never minding that the benchmark test was broken, I've redone it now under better circumstances (and more test iterations). I also added a few tests to measure number creation with %<n>c - %4c gets Really Slow if the numbers parsed gets larger then MAXINT.
(wider then 80 characters, sorry)
Athlon XP @ 1600Mhz 12-byte svalue | 8-byte svalue -mcpu=athlon-xp -O3 int64, double | int32, double | int32, float | | Pike start overhead..... 0.000s | 0.001s | 0.001s Ackermann............... 0.632s | 0.618s | 1.061s Array & String Juggling. 0.692s | 0.676s | 0.669s Read binary INT16....... 0.307s 3260870 | 0.251s 3989704 | 0.245s* 4079111 (/s) Read binary INT32....... 0.190s* 2638191 | 2.158s 231696 | 2.082s* 240154 (/s) Read binary INT128...... 0.888s 11261 | 0.773s* 12931 | 0.795s 12586 (/s) Clone null-object....... 0.201s 1496259 | 0.182s 1645408 | 0.179s* 1677763 (/s) Clone object............ 0.378s* 794702 | 0.393s 763889 | 0.380s 789474 (/s) Compile................. 1.107s 21797 | 1.064s 22678 | 1.048s* 23045 (lines/s) Compile & Exec.......... 0.972s* 618406 | 1.121s 536366 | 0.978s 615068 (lines/s) GC...................... 0.606s | 0.608s | 0.532s* Matrix multiplication... 0.423s | 0.411s | 0.406s* Loops Nested (local).... 0.342s 49012092 | 0.313s 53544306 | 0.250s 67108880 (iters/s) Loops Nested (global)... 0.550s 30504029 | 0.525s 31938709 | 0.459s* 36555864 (iters/s) Loops Recursed.......... 1.112s! 942964 | 1.301s 805712 | 0.858s* 1222116 (iters/s)
- fastest
! faster then expected
/ Mirar