digitalmars.D - C vs D benchmark result is strange?
- Gang Sung Jin (60/60) Apr 30 2004 test long Arithmetic result is:
- Ilya Minkov (11/84) Apr 30 2004 Against what compiler did you test? It has already been reported that
test long Arithmetic result is:
in D, 155744 ms
but C, 33388 ms
why so much different? int and double type Arithmetic result is similrar.
thanks.
test code D.ver is:
//from /* All code Copyright 2004 Christopher W. Cowell-Shah */
import std.math;
import std.date;
int main()
{
long longMin = 10000000000; // 10B
long longMax = 11000000000; // 11B
longArithmetic(longMin, longMax);
return 0;
}
double longArithmetic(long longMin, long longMax)
{
d_time startTime = getUTCtime();
long longResult = longMin;
long i = longMin;
while (i < longMax)
{
longResult -= i++;
longResult += i++;
longResult *= i++;
longResult /= i++;
}
d_time stopTime = getUTCtime();
double elapsedTime = (stopTime - startTime) / (TicksPerSecond / (double)
1000.0);
printf("Long arithmetic elapsed time: %1.0f ms with longMax %lld\n",
elapsedTime, longMax);
printf(" i: %lld\n", i);
printf(" longResult: %lld\n", longResult);
return elapsedTime;
}
C code is:
double longArithmetic(long long longMin, long long longMax)
{
double elapsedTime;
clock_t stopTime;
clock_t startTime = clock();
long long longResult = longMin;
long long i = longMin;
while (i < longMax)
{
longResult -= i++;
longResult += i++;
longResult *= i++;
longResult /= i++;
}
stopTime = clock();
elapsedTime = (stopTime - startTime) / (CLOCKS_PER_SEC / (double) 1000.0);
printf("Long arithmetic elapsed time: %1.0f ms with longMax %I64d\n",
elapsedTime, longMax);
printf(" i: %I64d\n", i);
printf(" longResult: %I64d\n", longResult);
return elapsedTime;
}
Apr 30 2004
Against what compiler did you test? It has already been reported that
DigitalMars compilers back-end are somewhat weakish in performance with
respect to 64-bit integers.
I you should get roughly the same result comparing DigitalMars D
compiler against DigitalMars C compiler.
Now there is also a new Gnu D compiler, giving you the ability to
compare against GCC. However, if it scores good - wonderful. If it
doesn't - no reason to worry, it has only been released a few weeks ago
and has a chance to improve.
-eye
Gang Sung Jin schrieb:
test long Arithmetic result is:
in D, 155744 ms
but C, 33388 ms
why so much different? int and double type Arithmetic result is similrar.
thanks.
test code D.ver is:
//from /* All code Copyright 2004 Christopher W. Cowell-Shah */
import std.math;
import std.date;
int main()
{
long longMin = 10000000000; // 10B
long longMax = 11000000000; // 11B
longArithmetic(longMin, longMax);
return 0;
}
double longArithmetic(long longMin, long longMax)
{
d_time startTime = getUTCtime();
long longResult = longMin;
long i = longMin;
while (i < longMax)
{
longResult -= i++;
longResult += i++;
longResult *= i++;
longResult /= i++;
}
d_time stopTime = getUTCtime();
double elapsedTime = (stopTime - startTime) / (TicksPerSecond / (double)
1000.0);
printf("Long arithmetic elapsed time: %1.0f ms with longMax %lld\n",
elapsedTime, longMax);
printf(" i: %lld\n", i);
printf(" longResult: %lld\n", longResult);
return elapsedTime;
}
C code is:
double longArithmetic(long long longMin, long long longMax)
{
double elapsedTime;
clock_t stopTime;
clock_t startTime = clock();
long long longResult = longMin;
long long i = longMin;
while (i < longMax)
{
longResult -= i++;
longResult += i++;
longResult *= i++;
longResult /= i++;
}
stopTime = clock();
elapsedTime = (stopTime - startTime) / (CLOCKS_PER_SEC / (double) 1000.0);
printf("Long arithmetic elapsed time: %1.0f ms with longMax %I64d\n",
elapsedTime, longMax);
printf(" i: %I64d\n", i);
printf(" longResult: %I64d\n", longResult);
return elapsedTime;
}
Apr 30 2004








Ilya Minkov <minkov cs.tum.edu>