From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: (from majordomo@localhost) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) id PAA07166; Thu, 27 Mar 2003 15:21:06 +0100 (MET) X-Authentication-Warning: pauillac.inria.fr: majordomo set sender to owner-caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr using -f Received: from concorde.inria.fr (concorde.inria.fr [192.93.2.39]) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) with ESMTP id PAA07052 for ; Thu, 27 Mar 2003 15:21:04 +0100 (MET) Received: from fichte.ai.univie.ac.at (fichte.ai.univie.ac.at [131.130.174.156]) by concorde.inria.fr (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id h2REL3515553 for ; Thu, 27 Mar 2003 15:21:03 +0100 (MET) Received: from fichte.ai.univie.ac.at (markus@localhost.ai.univie.ac.at [127.0.0.1]) by fichte.ai.univie.ac.at (8.12.3/8.12.3/Debian-5) with ESMTP id h2REL2V7005613; Thu, 27 Mar 2003 15:21:02 +0100 Received: (from markus@localhost) by fichte.ai.univie.ac.at (8.12.3/8.12.3/Debian-5) id h2REL1oR005612; Thu, 27 Mar 2003 15:21:01 +0100 Date: Thu, 27 Mar 2003 15:21:01 +0100 From: Markus Mottl To: Issac Trotts Cc: OCaml List Subject: Re: [Caml-list] DFT in OCaml vs. C Message-ID: <20030327142101.GB1931@fichte.ai.univie.ac.at> Mail-Followup-To: Issac Trotts , OCaml List References: <3E82A960.2070707@ucdavis.edu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <3E82A960.2070707@ucdavis.edu> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i Organization: Austrian Research Institute for Artificial Intelligence X-Spam: no; 0.00; caml-list:01 issac:01 trotts:01 0.040:01 timings:01 gcc:01 2.95.4:01 0.000:01 compiler:01 ocaml:01 benchmark:02 mottl:02 wrote:03 sys:03 markus:04 Sender: owner-caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr Precedence: bulk On Wed, 26 Mar 2003, Issac Trotts wrote: > The results on my 1 GHZ Pentium III Linux box: > > C: > real 0m21.273s > user 0m21.200s > sys 0m0.040s > > OCaml: > real 1m51.602s > user 1m47.020s > sys 0m0.260s Well, another insignificant benchmark... ;-) My timings on a 2.4 GHZ Pentium IV using GCC 2.95.4 and the latest CVS-checkout of OCaml: C: real 0m24.920s user 0m24.900s sys 0m0.020s OCaml: real 0m30.397s user 0m30.390s sys 0m0.000s The difference you have observed on your machine is most likely due to cache effects and possibly also due to compiler differences (GCC version). Regards, Markus Mottl -- Markus Mottl markus@oefai.at Austrian Research Institute for Artificial Intelligence http://www.oefai.at/~markus ------------------- To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr Archives: http://caml.inria.fr Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/ Beginner's list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ocaml_beginners