Well, we also weren't claiming to win "ALL benchmarks" compared to anything :-)
But your point is well taken, better benchmarking should be pretty valuable to the community moving forward. Chris On Mon, Jun 22, 2015 at 12:10 PM, Dragan Djuric <draga...@gmail.com> wrote: > So, there are exactly two measurements there: matrix multiplication and > vector addition for dimension 100 (which is quite small and should favor > vectorz). Here are the results on my machine: > > Matrix multiplications are given at the neanderthal web site at > http://neanderthal.uncomplicate.org/articles/benchmarks.html in much more > details than that, so I won't repeat that here. > > Vector addition according to criterium: 124ns vectorz vs 78ns neanderthal > on my i7 4790k > > Mind you that the project you pointed uses rather old library versions. I > updated them to the latest versions. Also, the code does not run for both > old and new versions properly (it complains about :clatrix) so I had to > evaluate it manually in the repl. > > I wonder why you complained that I didn't show more benchmark data about > my claims when I had shown much more (and relevant) data than it is > available for core.matrix, but I would use the opportunity to appeal to > core.matrix community to improve that. > > On Monday, June 22, 2015 at 8:13:29 PM UTC+2, Christopher Small wrote: >> >> For benchmarking, there's this: >> https://github.com/mikera/core.matrix.benchmark. It's pretty simple >> though. It would be nice to see something more robust and composable, and >> with nicer output options. I'll put a little bit of time into that now, but >> again, a bit busy to do as much as I'd like here :-) >> >> Chris >> >> >> On Mon, Jun 22, 2015 at 9:14 AM, Dragan Djuric <drag...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> >>>> As for performance benchmarks, I have to echo Mike that it seemed >>>> strange to me that you were claiming you were faster on ALL benchmarks when >>>> I'd only seen data on one. Would you mind sharing your full benchmarking >>>> analyses? >>>> >>> >>> I think this might be a very important issue, and I am glad that you >>> raised it. Has anyone shared any core.matrix (or, to be precise, >>> core.matrix) benchmark data? I know about Java benchmark code project that >>> include vectorz, but I think it would help core.matrix users to see the >>> actual numbers. One main thing vectorz (and core.matrix) is claiming is >>> that it is *fast*. Mike seemed a bit (pleasantly) surprised when I shared >>> my results for vectorz mmul... >>> >>> So, my proposal would be that you (or anyone else able and willing) >>> create a simple Clojure project that simply lists typical core.matrix use >>> cases, or just the core procedures in core.matrix code that you want to >>> measure and that you are interested to see Neanderthal doing. Ready >>> criterium infrastructure is cool, but I'm not even ask for that if you do >>> not have time. Just a setup with matrix objects and core.matrix function >>> calls that you want measured. Share your numbers and that project on Github >>> and I will contribute comparative code for Neanderthal benchmarks, and >>> results for both codes run on my machine. Of course, that would be micro >>> benchmarks, but useful anyway for you, one Neanderthal user (me :) and for >>> all core.matrix users. >>> >>> You interested? >>> >>> With all that out of the way... I'm glad that you're willing to play >>>> ball here with the core.matrix community, and thank you for what I think >>>> has been a very productive discussion. I think we all went from talking >>>> _past_ each other, to understanding what the issues are and can now >>>> hopefully start moving forward and making things happen. While I think we'd >>>> all love to have you (Dragan) personally working on the core.matrix >>>> implementations, I agree with Mars0i that just having you agree to >>>> work-with/advise others who would do the actual work is great. I'd >>>> personally love to take that on myself, but I already have about a half >>>> dozen side projects I'm working on which I barely have time for. Oh, and a >>>> four month old baby :scream:! So if there's anyone else who's willing, I >>>> may leave it to them :-) >>>> >>> >>> I'm also glad we understand each other better now :) >>> >>> -- >>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>> Groups "Clojure" group. >>> To post to this group, send email to clo...@googlegroups.com >>> Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with >>> your first post. >>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >>> clojure+u...@googlegroups.com >>> For more options, visit this group at >>> http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en >>> --- >>> You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the >>> Google Groups "Clojure" group. >>> To unsubscribe from this topic, visit >>> https://groups.google.com/d/topic/clojure/dFPOOw8pSGI/unsubscribe. >>> To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to >>> clojure+u...@googlegroups.com. >>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. >>> >> >> -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google > Groups "Clojure" group. > To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com > Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with > your first post. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en > --- > You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the > Google Groups "Clojure" group. > To unsubscribe from this topic, visit > https://groups.google.com/d/topic/clojure/dFPOOw8pSGI/unsubscribe. > To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to > clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your first post. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
