Wiki Diff EuphoriaBenchmarking, revision #1 to tip
= Interpreter Benchmarking
>**Euphoria is faster and sometimes much faster than other interpreters.**
Some benchmark results comparing Euphoria against some common interpreters. Results are in seconds which includes the startup time for each interpreter; lowest time is best.
|= Benchmark | //Argument// |=Euphoria\\Interpreter |=Euphoria\\Compiler |= Python |= Perl |
| ackermann | //10// | 24.9 | 0.97 | 73.9 | 92.4 |
| binary trees | //18// | 301 | 52.0 | 536 | 636 |
| fannkuch | //10// | 18.6 | 3.06 | 65.0 | 62.3 |
| n-body | //500000// | 37.3 | 15.4 | 57.5 | 68.7 |
| | | ,,eui version 4.04,, | ,,euc version 4.04,, | ,,python 2.6.5,, | ,,perl 5.10.1,, |
Benchmarking interpreters is hard work. A 'real' benchmark program is one you write yourself and corresponds to the particular application you are working on. Published benchmarks are just samples of how an interpreter may perform. Execution times are difficult duplicate because of caching and operating system considerations. But, more rigorous and scientific benchmarking will not change the conclusion that Euphoria is convincingly faster than other interpreters.
My test was on a netbook and Mint Linux. Python and Perl were already installed with the Mint distribution. Benchmarks were executed once.
== The Benchmarks
My suggestion: run your own benchmarks.
|= Links to Source-Code |
| [[ bench.ex -> BenchEx ]] |
| [[ ackermann -> AckerMann ]] |
| [[ binary trees -> BinaryTrees ]] |
| [[ fannkuch -> FannKuch ]] |
| [[ n-body -> NnBody ]] |
These benchmarks are based on the work by Jason Gade and his [[benchmark suite -> http://www.rapideuphoria.com/shootout.zip ]]. It includes a contribution by Derek Parnell.
----
== Simple Prime Number Benchmark
Ed Davis compared ~OpenEuphoria against several programming languages http://openeuphoria.org/forum/123413.wc?last_id=123417
On this benchmark --O[-- is surprisingly fast.
| [[ n-body -> NnBody ]] |
>**Euphoria is faster and sometimes much faster than other interpreters.**
Some benchmark results comparing Euphoria against some common interpreters. Results are in seconds which includes the startup time for each interpreter; lowest time is best.
|= Benchmark | //Argument// |=Euphoria\\Interpreter |=Euphoria\\Compiler |= Python |= Perl |
| ackermann | //10// | 24.9 | 0.97 | 73.9 | 92.4 |
| binary trees | //18// | 301 | 52.0 | 536 | 636 |
| fannkuch | //10// | 18.6 | 3.06 | 65.0 | 62.3 |
| n-body | //500000// | 37.3 | 15.4 | 57.5 | 68.7 |
| | | ,,eui version 4.04,, | ,,euc version 4.04,, | ,,python 2.6.5,, | ,,perl 5.10.1,, |
Benchmarking interpreters is hard work. A 'real' benchmark program is one you write yourself and corresponds to the particular application you are working on. Published benchmarks are just samples of how an interpreter may perform. Execution times are difficult duplicate because of caching and operating system considerations. But, more rigorous and scientific benchmarking will not change the conclusion that Euphoria is convincingly faster than other interpreters.
My test was on a netbook and Mint Linux. Python and Perl were already installed with the Mint distribution. Benchmarks were executed once.
== The Benchmarks
My suggestion: run your own benchmarks.
|= Links to Source-Code |
| [[ bench.ex -> BenchEx ]] |
| [[ ackermann -> AckerMann ]] |
| [[ binary trees -> BinaryTrees ]] |
| [[ fannkuch -> FannKuch ]] |
| [[ n-body -> NnBody ]] |
These benchmarks are based on the work by Jason Gade and his [[benchmark suite -> http://www.rapideuphoria.com/shootout.zip ]]. It includes a contribution by Derek Parnell.
----
== Simple Prime Number Benchmark
Ed Davis compared ~OpenEuphoria against several programming languages http://openeuphoria.org/forum/123413.wc?last_id=123417
On this benchmark --O[-- is surprisingly fast.
