MathGroup Archive 1991

[Date Index] [Thread Index] [Author Index]

Search the Archive

Mma 2.0 slower than 1.0?

It appears to me that Mma 2.0 is slower than Mma 1.0 on numerical

For example, consider this trivial benchmark (100,000 real  

Timing[ Block[{x = 1.00001,y = 1.0000}, Do[ y *= x, {100000} ]; y] ]

On my NeXTStation, I get, using Mma  kernel 1.2:

{54.1833 Second, 2.718268237192294}

While using Mma kernel 2.0 I get 

{59.4667 Second, 2.71827}

Thus it appears that 2.0 is 10% slower than 1.0 on the trivial
benchmark of doing 100,000 multiplies. Hmm. Has anyone else
benchmarked 1.0 vs 2.0? I thought 2.0 was supposed to be faster!

(I have experimented with Compile-ing the above program, but it
always hits an error and says 


   Numerical error encountered at instruction 23
    ; proceeding with uncompiled evaluation.

and so end up taking about 1 second longer. Probably I need to learn  
more about how to convert the benchmark to a suitable form for the
compiler to enhance...I'm waiting for my docs...)

  • Prev by Date: pipes in Mathematica
  • Next by Date: Re: unmap or remove header command
  • Previous by thread: pipes in Mathematica
  • Next by thread: Re: unmap or remove header command