On Friday 22 June 2007 19:54:16 Philip Armstrong wrote: > On Fri, Jun 22, 2007 at 10:11:27PM +0400, Bulat Ziganshin wrote: > >btw, *their* measurement said that ocaml is 7% faster :) > > Indeed. The gcc-4.0 compilied binary runs at about 15s IIRC, but it's > still much better than 7% faster than the ocaml binary.
What architecture, platform, compiler versions and compile lines are you using? On my 2x 2.2GHz Athlon64 running x64 Debian I now get: GHC 6.6.1: 26.5s ghc -funbox-strict-fields -O3 ray.hs -o ray OCaml 3.10.0: 14.158s ocamlopt -inline 1000 ray.ml -o ray g++ 4.1.3: 8.056s g++ -O3 -ffast-math ray.cpp -o ray Also, the benchmarks and results that I cited before are more up to date than the ones you're using. In particular, you might be interested in these faster versions: http://www.ffconsultancy.com/languages/ray_tracer/code/5/ray.ml http://www.ffconsultancy.com/languages/ray_tracer/code/5/ray.cpp For "./ray 6 512", I get: OCaml: 3.140s ocamlopt -inline 1000 ray.ml -o ray C++: 2.970s g++ -O3 -ffast-math ray.cpp -o ray -- Dr Jon D Harrop, Flying Frog Consultancy Ltd. The OCaml Journal http://www.ffconsultancy.com/products/ocaml_journal/?e _______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
