Benchmark: OOPack
Thomas Kuehne
thomas-dloop at kuehne.cn
Fri Oct 13 04:31:36 PDT 2006
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
After roughly 2 years( http://www.digitalmars.com/pnews/read.php?server=news.digitalmars.com&group=digitalmars.D&artnum=12277 )
I've generated new test results for OOPack:
http://dstress.kuehne.cn/benchmark/oopack/oopack-results.pdf
extract:
dmd-0.169 -O -release -inline
Seconds Mflops
Test Iterations C OOP C OOP Ratio
- ---- ---------- ----------- ----------- -----
Iterator 400000 3.280 4.520 243.902 176.991 1.378
Complex 200000 2.020 158.09 792.079 10.121 78.262
Matrix 3000 3.270 4.560 229.358 164.474 1.394
Max 1000000 3.760 3.990 265.957 250.627 1.061
gdc-0.19(gcc-3.4.6) -c -O3 -frelease -finline-functions -m32
Seconds Mflops
Test Iterations C OOP C OOP Ratio
- ---- ---------- ----------- ----------- -----
Iterator 400000 1.090 4.260 733.945 187.793 3.908
Complex 200000 1.360 241.1 1176.471 6.636 177.279
Matrix 3000 1.140 3.530 657.895 212.465 3.096
Max 1000000 4.100 4.100 243.902 243.902 1.000
g++-4.1.1 -O3 -m32
Seconds Mflops
Test Iterations C OOP C OOP Ratio
- ---- ---------- ----------- ----------- -----
Iterator 400000 1.1 1.1 733.9 740.7 1.0
Complex 200000 1.1 1.1 1428.6 1403.5 1.0
Matrix 3000 1.1 1.1 663.7 663.7 1.0
Max 1000000 3.0 3.1 327.9 326.8 1.0
While the gaps between GCC, GDC and DMD have narrowed, "Complex" still
poses a serious problem for GDC and DMD.
The C version of "Iterator" seems to be surprisingly hard for DMD:
DMD / GDC / GCC = 243.902 / 733.945 / 733.9 Mflops
It would be interesting to see how DM, DMD and GDC compete on a
MSWindows system.
Thomas
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
iD8DBQFFL4X7LK5blCcjpWoRAqNYAJ44mG/ooXg0Wpv4OMpp/wP5jTjDeACeOy2I
ThDvTrHyC2/zdQzBbfTEd0U=
=LXOf
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
More information about the Digitalmars-d
mailing list