[gambit-list] Interactive 3D graphics with Gambit-C
Alex Queiroz
asandroq at gmail.com
Tue Jan 5 21:20:51 EST 2010
Hallo,
On Tue, Sep 23, 2008 at 6:14 PM, Bradley Lucier <lucier at math.purdue.edu> wrote:
>
>
> GCs are often very short, on the order of milliseconds, for example on
> a 2.0GHz G5:
>
> [descartes:~/Desktop] lucier% gsi
> Gambit v4.2.8
>
> > (##gc-report-set! #t)
> > (define a (time (expt 3 10000000)))
> *** GC: 1 ms, 692K alloc, 386K heap, 82.0K live (21% 65712+18208)
> *** GC: 1 ms, 992K alloc, 386K heap, 88.0K live (23% 71920+18208)
> *** GC: 1 ms, 1.19M alloc, 1.27M heap, 94.8K live (7% 55584+41536)
> *** GC: 2 ms, 2.08M alloc, 2.22M heap, 163K live (7% 55456+111184)
> *** GC: 2 ms, 3.22M alloc, 4.05M heap, 253K live (6% 55392+204064)
> *** GC: 2 ms, 5.48M alloc, 6.86M heap, 435K live (6% 55328+389808)
> *** GC: 4 ms, 9.98M alloc, 14.2M heap, 797K live (5% 55264+761280)
> *** GC: 7 ms, 19.0M alloc, 27.2M heap, 1.49M live (5% 55200+1504224)
> *** GC: 12 ms, 36.9M alloc, 54.0M heap, 2.90M live (5% 55136+2990128)
> (time (expt 3 10000000))
> 1165 ms real time
> 1096 ms cpu time (936 user, 160 system)
> 9 collections accounting for 33 ms real time (9 user, 23 system)
> 71837896 bytes allocated
> no minor faults
> no major faults
>
I know this is an oooold thread, but I just compiled Gambit-C
with Clang and wanted something to compare with. The time I got is
roughly 1/3 of this:
(time (expt 3 10000000))
480 ms real time
478 ms cpu time (418 user, 60 system)
15 collections accounting for 13 ms real time (6 user, 7 system)
71857592 bytes allocated
13810 minor faults
no major faults
This is a 2.4GHz Core 2 Duo running Snow Leopard, so some of the
improvement must be due to the CPU difference.
Cheers,
--
-alex
@asandroq
http://www.ventonegro.org/
More information about the Gambit-list
mailing list