I ran with same mesh sizes and for equal time steps.
On August 12, 2014 1:57:30 PM EDT, Jan Blechta <[email protected]> wrote: >If FyPi Canh-Hilliard example is this one >http://www.ctcms.nist.gov/fipy/examples/cahnHilliard/generated/examples.cahnHilliard.mesh2DCoupled.html >then the reason is very simple: > ># FEniCS >mesh = UnitSquareMesh(96, 96) > ># FiPy >__name__ == "__main__": > nx = ny = 20 >else: > nx = ny = 10 >mesh = Grid2D(nx=nx, ny=ny, dx=0.25, dy=0.25) > >Also the function space may be different if FiPy's 'CellVariable' is >something-like piece-wise constants. > >Jan > > >On Tue, 12 Aug 2014 10:42:50 -0400 >Aniruddha Jana <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Hello, >> >> I am trying to learn FEniCS, and have been using FiPy so far. I ran >> the Python Cahn-Hilliard example. The program took around 80 seconds >> to run in serial, while a FiPy Cahn-Hillard program with similar size >> and settings took only 2.72 seconds. I think I am making some mistake >> here as I expected FEniCS to be better than FiPy in terms of speed. >> >> Can somebody please comment on the speed and memory issues, >> especially in comparison to FiPy? Since I am trying to learn using >> FEniCS, I would appreciate any such comments. >> >> Many thanks, >> Aniruddha >> _______________________________________________ >> fenics mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://fenicsproject.org/mailman/listinfo/fenics
_______________________________________________ fenics mailing list [email protected] http://fenicsproject.org/mailman/listinfo/fenics
