Mathematica 9 is now available
Services & Resources / Wolfram Forums
-----
 /
MathGroup Archive
1996
*January
*February
*March
*April
*May
*June
*July
*August
*September
*October
*November
*December
*Archive Index
*Ask about this page
*Print this page
*Give us feedback
*Sign up for the Wolfram Insider

MathGroup Archive 1996

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

Search the Archive

2.2.3 Running under Win 95

  • Subject: [mg2902] 2.2.3 Running under Win 95
  • From: hasmith at garnet.acns.fsu.edu ("Harry A. Smith")
  • Date: 9 Jan 1996 04:35:11 -0600
  • Approved: usenet@wri.com
  • Distribution: local
  • Newsgroups: wri.mathgroup
  • Organization: CMDS News machine
  • Sender: mj at wri.com

I had purchased the "standard" version of Mma for windows and was 
informed by Wolfram that the standard version had been discontinued and 
that for $145 I could upgrade to the enhanced or professional version. 
So I did. I recently got the "enhanced" version expecting it to run 
faster. Much to my surprise, it runs *slower* than the standard version!

Here is the timing test I did:
Plot3D[Sin[x]*Cos[y],{x,-Pi,Pi},{y,-Pi,Pi}]
On my Pentium 120, the standard version takes 1.92 seconds to execute 
this. The "enhanced" mode takes from 2.8 to 3.6 seconds! There seems to 
be no consistency on the timing redults I get. I am running both codes 
under Win95 on a P120 with 16 MB RAM.

Interstingly, when I run the same code on a Mac Quadra 650 (68040, 33 
mHz) using the enhanced version I get the same timings as on the Pentium 
120! What's going on here? Did I waste my $145? My problem is that I use 
this machine to perform computationally intense simulations and I just 
can't afford this kind of performance hit when I "upgrade". 

Other problems I have noted:
a. I can't interrupt any calculation! 2.21 works, 2.23 doesn't!
b. I can't load a file from the numbered file list
c. The timing function doesn't work anymore after a loop calculation, so 
I can't time my code to test the timing of the calculations (which I 
need to report in my research)

I did install correctly the patch to let Mma 2.23 work under Win 95. My 
real question is why would the co-processor version actually run slower 
than the non-coprocessor version? Did I do something wrong? Has anyone 
else noticed this? Is there anything I can do?
-- 
Harry A. Smith
Professor of Biological Sciences
Tallahassee Community College
hasmith at garnet.acns.fsu.edu
"If you're not simulating, you're not stimulating!"


  • Prev by Date: Re: Part
  • Next by Date: Re: Part
  • Previous by thread: 2.2.3 Running under Win 95
  • Next by thread: log-probability axis plot