Mathematica 9 is now available
Services & Resources / Wolfram Forums
-----
 /
MathGroup Archive
2007
*January
*February
*March
*April
*May
*June
*July
*August
*September
*October
*Archive Index
*Ask about this page
*Print this page
*Give us feedback
*Sign up for the Wolfram Insider

MathGroup Archive 2007

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

Search the Archive

Re: Mathematica v6: Slower in the following fields

  • To: mathgroup at smc.vnet.net
  • Subject: [mg76380] Re: Mathematica v6: Slower in the following fields
  • From: "xyfengcn at gmail.com" <xyfengcn at gmail.com>
  • Date: Sun, 20 May 2007 02:44:35 -0400 (EDT)
  • References: <200705090828.EAA13415@smc.vnet.net><f21cr7$5qh$1@smc.vnet.net>

On 5=D4=C211=C8=D5, =CF=C2=CE=E75=CA=B125=B7=D6, "alexxx.ma... at gmail.com" <=
alexxx.ma... at gmail.com>
wrote:
> Hi everybody,
> thank you for the useful info.
> To get a more correct comparison, I'm giving you a comparison 6.0 vs.
> 5.2 under Linux, using, for the Mathematica processes running:
>         vsz                                    virtual memory size of
> the process in KiB (1024-byte units).
>         rss                       resident set size, the non-swapped
> physical memory that a task has used (in kiloBytes).
>
> For 5.2:
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> (VSZ) ( RSS)
>
> 8172  24240 Mathematica
> 12312  44264 MathKernel
>
> (dopo apertura Help):
> 9304  25184 Mathematica
> 12312  44264 MathKernel
>
> In[1]:=img=Table[Random[Integer],{400},{249}];
>
> 11704  27500 Mathematica
> 16756  48532 MathKernel
>
> In[2]:=ListDensityPlot[img,Mesh->False,AspectRatio->Automatic]
>
> 11580  27304 Mathematica
> 16952  48624 MathKernel
>
> ... so we went from ~ (8/24 + 12/44) MB to (11/27 + 17/49) MB for
> (Mathematica + MathKernel).
> The new situation is instead:
>
> For 6.0:
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> 36920 146980 Mathematica
> 14412 149840 MathKernel
> 29992 481012 java
>
> (dopo apertura Help):
> 40388 150152 Mathematica
> 31216 166456 MathKernel
> 38948 509044 java
>
> In[1]:= img = RandomInteger[1, {400, 249}];
> 42468 152148 Mathematica
> 31648 166848 MathKernel
> 39400 509044 java
>
> In[2]:= ListDensityPlot[img, Mesh -> False, AspectRatio -> Automatic]
>
> 58144 169816 Mathematica
> 282284 418064 MathKernel
> 39400 509044 java
>
> Therefore (in MB):
>
>                            5.2
> 6.0
>                    VSZ         RSS                       VSZ
> RSS
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------=
-- -----------------------------------
> start               8             24
> 37           147                  [Mathematica]
>                      12             44
> 14           150                  [MathKernel]
>
> 30             48                  [java]
>
> finish              11            27
> 58           170                  [Mathematica]
>                        17           49
> 280          418                  [MathKernel]
>
> 39         509                  [java]
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------=
-- -----------------------------------
>
> Now I see why I had to shut it down after a few more calculations! The
> frontend is relatively stable, while both the kernel and java (java?
> Why?) exploded in memory usage.
>
> I still have to try the additional option you suggested, I'll let you
> know - but something is clearly wrong here, considering the small size
> of the object I'm trying to plot...
>
> thanks!
>
> Alessandro
>
> P.S.
> Even worse problems I had using ListContourPlot, which I cannot
> quantify since it slows my machine to a crawl forcing me to kill the
> process (LCPlot using a more regular image, of course)
>
> Chris Chiasson ha scritto:
>
>
>
> > Are you manually setting PlotPoints in 6.0? In the new version,
> > PlotPoints *seems* to mean something different than it did in 5.2
> > (i.e. lots more subdivisions per plotpoint).
>
> > On 5/9/07, alexxx.ma... at gmail.com <alexxx.ma... at gmail.com> wrote:
> > > I installed v6, but had to return to 5.2 since  - for some works I was
> > > doing - the new version has become unacceptably slow. Now I changed my
> > > mind and I keep both versions on, depending on what I have to do.
>
> > > I'd like to start this thread to see people post their observations
> > > about what has become slower in v6 - and of course what is faster too!
>
> > > e.g. some posts ago I saw somebody having problems with eigenvalues
> > > calculations.
>
> > > My problems, just to start, relate to graphics. Dealing with large
> > > images with ListContourPlot, for example, is really slower (had to
> > > kill the calculation). And ListDensityPlot is barely acceptable.
>
> > > So... please, add your experience here!
>
> > > Alessandro Magni
>
> > --
> >http://chris.chiasson.name/- =D2=FE=B2=D8=B1=BB=D2=FD=D3=C3=CE=C4=D7=D6 -
>
> - =CF=D4=CA=BE=D2=FD=D3=C3=B5=C4=CE=C4=D7=D6 -

when PlotPoints>50,ContourPlot is very very very
very...............SLOW



  • Prev by Date: Mathematica 6 review [first impressions]
  • Next by Date: Re: what are the options for the "String" export format?
  • Previous by thread: Re: Mathematica v6: Slower in the following fields
  • Next by thread: Re: Mathematica v6: Slower in the following fields