* Mini ray tracer @ 2005-06-13 2:46 Jon Harrop 2005-06-13 3:24 ` [Caml-list] " Alex Goldman 0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread From: Jon Harrop @ 2005-06-13 2:46 UTC (permalink / raw) To: caml-list I've been fiddling with my ray tracer again this weekend. This time I've come up with a comparison of four different (progressively optimised) versions of the ray tracer implemented in C++, Java, OCaml and SML: http://www.ffconsultancy.com/free/ray_tracer/languages.html OCaml is significantly more concise that the other languages (even SML) but the big surprise for me was the incredible performance of straightforwardly- written Mlton-compiled SML, even on AMD64 where it lacks a native code-gen. -- Dr Jon D Harrop, Flying Frog Consultancy Ltd. Objective CAML for Scientists http://www.ffconsultancy.com/products/ocaml_for_scientists ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [Caml-list] Mini ray tracer 2005-06-13 2:46 Mini ray tracer Jon Harrop @ 2005-06-13 3:24 ` Alex Goldman 2005-06-16 6:20 ` Jon Harrop 0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread From: Alex Goldman @ 2005-06-13 3:24 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Jon Harrop; +Cc: caml-list > http://www.ffconsultancy.com/free/ray_tracer/languages.html Thanks. A lot of very interesting stuff there. I'm surprised that SMLNJ is as fast as OCamlopt on x86. I thought it had a reputation for being slow because it's "continuations-based" (or whatever). Java is the only one bytecode-compiled, so it's also interesting that it's competitive in speed. It might be interesting to see how C/C++ does when linked with Boehm's GC. My own experiments with it impressed me very much. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [Caml-list] Mini ray tracer 2005-06-13 3:24 ` [Caml-list] " Alex Goldman @ 2005-06-16 6:20 ` Jon Harrop 2005-06-16 15:41 ` Jon Harrop 0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread From: Jon Harrop @ 2005-06-16 6:20 UTC (permalink / raw) To: caml-list On Monday 13 June 2005 04:24, Alex Goldman wrote: > > http://www.ffconsultancy.com/free/ray_tracer/languages.html > > Thanks. A lot of very interesting stuff there. I'm surprised that > SMLNJ is as fast as OCamlopt on x86... Ahem, it seems that the evil Matthias Blume worked an ingenious bug into his SML port of my ray tracer which sped it up by 70%. So I've redone the study and SML is now much less favourable. -- Dr Jon D Harrop, Flying Frog Consultancy Ltd. Objective CAML for Scientists http://www.ffconsultancy.com/products/ocaml_for_scientists ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [Caml-list] Mini ray tracer 2005-06-16 6:20 ` Jon Harrop @ 2005-06-16 15:41 ` Jon Harrop 0 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread From: Jon Harrop @ 2005-06-16 15:41 UTC (permalink / raw) To: caml-list On Thursday 16 June 2005 07:20, Jon Harrop wrote: > On Monday 13 June 2005 04:24, Alex Goldman wrote: > > > http://www.ffconsultancy.com/free/ray_tracer/languages.html > > > > Thanks. A lot of very interesting stuff there. I'm surprised that > > SMLNJ is as fast as OCamlopt on x86... > > Ahem, it seems that the evil Matthias Blume worked an ingenious bug into > his SML port of my ray tracer which sped it up by 70%. So I've redone the > study and SML is now much less favourable. Matthias is denying all knowledge of this so I guess I'll have to take responsibility myself. Anyhow, I've updated the language comparison with a table comparing OCaml and SML: http://www.ffconsultancy.com/free/ray_tracer/languages.html -- Dr Jon D Harrop, Flying Frog Consultancy Ltd. Objective CAML for Scientists http://www.ffconsultancy.com/products/ocaml_for_scientists ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Mini ray tracer @ 2005-04-28 9:37 Jon Harrop 2005-05-02 19:48 ` Julian Brown 0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread From: Jon Harrop @ 2005-04-28 9:37 UTC (permalink / raw) To: caml-list I just knocked up a little ray tracer in OCaml to test its viability for the shootout: http://www.ffconsultancy.com/free/ray_tracer/ Here, it traces a 768^2 image of 66,430 spheres in 22.51s on a 1.2GHz Athlon-Thunderbird and in 7.24s on a 1.8GHz Athlon 64. I've boiled it down to 94 LOC and posted it to the shootout mailing list. -- Dr Jon D Harrop, Flying Frog Consultancy Ltd. Objective CAML for Scientists http://www.ffconsultancy.com/products/ocaml_for_scientists ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: Mini ray tracer 2005-04-28 9:37 Jon Harrop @ 2005-05-02 19:48 ` Julian Brown 0 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread From: Julian Brown @ 2005-05-02 19:48 UTC (permalink / raw) To: caml-list On 2005-04-28, Jon Harrop <jon@ffconsultancy.com> wrote: > > I just knocked up a little ray tracer in OCaml to test its viability for the > shootout: > > http://www.ffconsultancy.com/free/ray_tracer/ > > Here, it traces a 768^2 image of 66,430 spheres in 22.51s on a 1.2GHz > Athlon-Thunderbird and in 7.24s on a 1.8GHz Athlon 64. > > I've boiled it down to 94 LOC and posted it to the shootout mailing list. Re: http://www.ffconsultancy.com/free/ray_tracer/comparison.html Interesting results, but it's kind of unfair to leave optimisation turned off for g++! What kind of results do you get with, say, -O3 -ffast-math? Cheers, Julian ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2005-06-16 15:42 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 6+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed) -- links below jump to the message on this page -- 2005-06-13 2:46 Mini ray tracer Jon Harrop 2005-06-13 3:24 ` [Caml-list] " Alex Goldman 2005-06-16 6:20 ` Jon Harrop 2005-06-16 15:41 ` Jon Harrop -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below -- 2005-04-28 9:37 Jon Harrop 2005-05-02 19:48 ` Julian Brown
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox; as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).