[gambit-list] Comparing gambit bignums with gmp 4.2.1
Bradley Lucier
lucier at math.purdue.edu
Thu May 24 13:50:05 EDT 2007
I'll get these comparisons out now before gmp 5 comes out ;-).
Here are some comparisons with gmp for large integers. This is with
the _num.scm I sent you earlier.
(define a (time (expt 3 2095903)))
(define b (time (expt 7 1183294)))
(define c (time (expt 11 1920505)))
I chose these numbers because they were used in a talk by Paul
Zimmermann; I presume he chose them because
> (map integer-length (list a b c (expt 10 1000000)))
(3321928 3321927 6643856 3321929)
I believe that on smaller numbers gmp should be significantly faster
than gambit.
On my laptop (1.67GHz PowerPC 7450, gcc 4.1.2, 32 bit), times in seconds
Gambit GMP 4.2.1
(* a b) .907 .40
(quotient c a) 4.176 1.70
(integer-sqrt c) 4.179 1.35
(gcd a b) 55.494 224.31
On my desktop (2.0GHz PowerPC 970, gcc 4.1.2, 64 bit):
(* a b) .352 .13
(quotient c a) 1.744 .59
(integer-sqrt c) 1.813 .46
(gcd a b) 24.071 36.56
On a server (2.2GHz Opteron, gcc 4.1.2, 64 bit):
(* a b) .344 .17
(quotient c a) 1.550 .73
(integer-sqrt c) 1.526 .57
(gcd a b) 17.713 31.34
GMP was compiled with
gcc -O3 -mcpu=970 -m64 -o test test.c -I/pkgs/gmp-4.2.1-64/include/ -
L/pkgs/gmp-4.2.1-64/lib -lgmp
and similarly for the other machines.
Brad
More information about the Gambit-list
mailing list