       Re: MMA 5.1 Integrals

• To: mathgroup at smc.vnet.net
• Subject: [mg52760] Re: MMA 5.1 Integrals
• From: nospam nospam <nospam_please at nospam.com>
• Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2004 04:21:52 -0500 (EST)
• References: <cpauqc\$ipm\$1@smc.vnet.net>
• Sender: owner-wri-mathgroup at wolfram.com

```Egbert Kankeleit wrote:

> Someone with  elitist "insight" can understand  the philosophy
>
> Example (win2000, 850 MHz):
>
> i)     Timing[ FourierTransform[Exp[-(x + 1)^2] , x, X];]
>
> ii)     Timing[ Integrate[Exp[-(x + 1)^2 + I *x *X],
>         {x, -\[Infinity],\[Infinity]}];]
>
> iii)     Timing[ LaplaceTransform[Exp[-(x + 1)^2], x, X];]
>
> results respectively:
>          MMA 4.2,                  MMA 5.0            MMA5.1
>
> i)         1.4                    Infinity          117.       seconds
> ii)        1.0                    45.                     1.9
> iii)       0.15                    1.0                   1.0
>
>
> kankel
>
>

You must have very old PC or something?
I am running XP, and I tried the third test, and I get (my
PC is almost 3 years old), this is Mathematica 5.1

d = Table[Timing[LaplaceTransform[Exp[-(x + 1)^2], x, X]][[1, 1]]
, {i, 100}];

Mean[d]
0.10094

Min[d]
0.078

Max[d]
0.11

so I get something faster than 4.2

You have to understand that the FIRST time you run the
command, it can take as much as 10 times longer, since
it will load the code to memory when needed. so get
an accourate test, try the command once, then the
second time will be the actual timing results you want to
look at.

I found Mathematica to be very fast actually.

```

• Prev by Date: Re: Iteration of Initial Conditions for required Boundary Value with NDSolve
• Next by Date: Re: Sorting question
• Previous by thread: Re: Mathematica 5.1 Integrals
• Next by thread: Re: MMA 5.1 Integrals