Re: Sheer idle curiousity . . .

Running a comparison of a, c and e several times on Win 7, Strawberry 5.16 shows the following results:

       Rate   e   a   c
e 7079226/s  -- -1% -3%
a 7185758/s  2%  -- -1%
c 7269278/s  3%  1%  --

       Rate   e   c   a
e 7072032/s  -- -1% -3%
c 7143388/s  1%  -- -2%
a 7316126/s  3%  2%  --

       Rate   c   e   a
c 7161561/s  -- -1% -4%
e 7257544/s  1%  -- -2%
a 7427981/s  4%  2%  --
[download]

so my conclusion would be that the difference between the three is negligible. This is with -34 as the test number. For +34 the picture is quite different:

        Rate    e    a    c
e  6807195/s   -- -26% -37%
a  9201425/s  35%   -- -15%
c 10867659/s  60%  18%   --
[download]

where c is a clear and consistent winner.

What shall I make of this in the light of the thread above?

Comment on Re: Sheer idle curiousity . . . Select or Download Code

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^2: Sheer idle curiousity . . . by Anonymous Monk on Oct 24, 2013 at 08:19 UTC
What shall I make of this in the light of the thread above? That CPUs have differences in performance, and so do Perl versions? `# This is perl, v5.10.1 (*) built for i486-linux-gnu-thread-multi # negative Rate d c e a b d 1219274/s -- -7% -15% -20% -31% c 1315339/s 8% -- -9% -13% -26% e 1441482/s 18% 10% -- -5% -19% a 1519028/s 25% 15% 5% -- -15% b 1778883/s 46% 35% 23% 17% -- # positive Rate d e c a b d 1300194/s -- -3% -6% -13% -13% e 1336169/s 3% -- -3% -10% -10% c 1375954/s 6% 3% -- -7% -8% a 1486080/s 14% 11% 8% -- -0% b 1492276/s 15% 12% 8% 0% --` [download] The winner here is, quite unexpectedly, B. Another cpu, also on Perl 5.10.1 but amd64, says B is 80% faster than the worst contender (E) when negative; and A is 51% faster than E (B having the second place at 42% faster) when positive. Third cpu with Perl 5.14.4 gives a negligible win for E -- D being the low anchor. So I think we can conclude that the Perl version matters the most?	[reply] [d/l]

Replies are listed 'Best First'.

Re^2: Sheer idle curiousity . . .
by Anonymous Monk on Oct 24, 2013 at 08:19 UTC

What shall I make of this in the light of the thread above?

That CPUs have differences in performance, and so do Perl versions?

# This is perl, v5.10.1 (*) built for i486-linux-gnu-thread-multi

# negative
       Rate    d    c    e    a    b
d 1219274/s   --  -7% -15% -20% -31%
c 1315339/s   8%   --  -9% -13% -26%
e 1441482/s  18%  10%   --  -5% -19%
a 1519028/s  25%  15%   5%   -- -15%
b 1778883/s  46%  35%  23%  17%   --

# positive
       Rate    d    e    c    a    b
d 1300194/s   --  -3%  -6% -13% -13%
e 1336169/s   3%   --  -3% -10% -10%
c 1375954/s   6%   3%   --  -7%  -8%
a 1486080/s  14%  11%   8%   --  -0%
b 1492276/s  15%  12%   8%   0%   --
[download]

The winner here is, quite unexpectedly, B.

Another cpu, also on Perl 5.10.1 but amd64, says B is 80% faster than the worst contender (E) when negative; and A is 51% faster than E (B having the second place at 42% faster) when positive.

Third cpu with Perl 5.14.4 gives a negligible win for E -- D being the low anchor. So I think we can conclude that the Perl version matters the most?

[reply]
[d/l]