From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Delivered-To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr Received: from nez-perce.inria.fr (nez-perce.inria.fr [192.93.2.78]) by yquem.inria.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id C2167BC40 for ; Mon, 1 Nov 2004 01:05:53 +0100 (CET) Received: from smtp1.adl2.internode.on.net (smtp1.adl2.internode.on.net [203.16.214.181]) by nez-perce.inria.fr (8.13.0/8.13.0) with ESMTP id iA105pox028835 for ; Mon, 1 Nov 2004 01:05:52 +0100 Received: from [192.168.1.200] (ppp217-99.lns1.syd3.internode.on.net [203.122.217.99]) by smtp1.adl2.internode.on.net (8.12.9/8.12.9) with ESMTP id iA105f4Y001730; Mon, 1 Nov 2004 10:35:42 +1030 (CST) Subject: Re: [Caml-list] bigarrays much lower than normal ones From: skaller Reply-To: skaller@users.sourceforge.net To: Hal Daume III Cc: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain Organization: Message-Id: <1099267540.15048.5.camel@pelican.wigram> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.2.2 (1.2.2-4) Date: 01 Nov 2004 11:05:41 +1100 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Miltered: at nez-perce with ID 41857DDF.000 by Joe's j-chkmail (http://j-chkmail.ensmp.fr)! X-Spam: no; 0.00; caml-list:01 bigarrays:01 sourceforge:01 wrote:01 bigarrays:01 converts:01 glebe:01 061:98 nsw:01 slower:01 caches:01 snail:02 2037:02 otoh:02 programming:03 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.0.0 (2004-09-13) on yquem.inria.fr X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=disabled version=3.0.0 X-Spam-Level: On Mon, 2004-11-01 at 03:05, Hal Daume III wrote: > I'm also really shocked that the 32 bit float bigarrays are slower than > the 64 bit ones! IEEE hardware loads/saves 64 bit and converts internally to 80 bit. 32 bit requires extra conversions. OTOH you might save on memory and gain some performance wrt caches. -- John Skaller, mailto:skaller@users.sf.net voice: 061-2-9660-0850, snail: PO BOX 401 Glebe NSW 2037 Australia Checkout the Felix programming language http://felix.sf.net