Daniel Lord wrote:
> Kent,
>
> Thanks for the link. I am just lazy (that's why I like Python over
> C/CPP/ObjC when I can get away with it) and would prefer the lightweight
> (to design and code that is not as in process overhead) threads over
> separate application processes. But certainly you
Kent,
Thanks for the link. I am just lazy (that's why I like Python over C/
CPP/ObjC when I can get away with it) and would prefer the lightweight
(to design and code that is not as in process overhead) threads over
separate application processes. But certainly you get more flexibility
and
Daniel Lord wrote:
> My point was that, as I understand it, thanks to the GIL--Python
> cannot easily take advantage of multi-cores period even when the
> program uses multiple threads--it it is a limitation of the
> implementation of the language interpreter. I guess that tells us we
> oug
Daniel> ... the benchmark wasn't written to take advantage of multi-core
Daniel> machines--silly me I thought any good benchmark would be.
A little bit of pystone history. Python's pystone benchmark is a
translation of the Dhrystone benchmark, which was originally written in Ada
in the m
Jack,
My bus is 1.33 GHz--I think the 2nd Gen Quad-cores are bumped to 1.5
GHz maybe. I'll see if there is anything I can do to bump the numbers.
My system is just like yours but with a second Quad core chip that
only a few apps can take advantage of.
It helps me with Modo, Lightwave, Shake, P
Will do, though I am not expecting great results given what we know now.
I'll post the numbers as soon as I can get it done.
On Jan 20, 2008, at 11:05 PM, Ronald Oussoren wrote:
>
> On 20 Jan, 2008, at 19:23, Daniel Lord wrote:
>
>> I ran the test on my 1st Gen Quad Core ( 2 x Quad-core 3.0 GHz,
On 20 Jan, 2008, at 19:23, Daniel Lord wrote:
I ran the test on my 1st Gen Quad Core ( 2 x Quad-core 3.0 GHz, 13GB
RAM) and was a bit surprised to see little improvement over the Core
Duo numbers.
63019.7 pystones/second
I am assuming the GIL is limiting threading and therefore I am really
Jack> So: any other speculations as to why 2.66Ghz->3.0Ghz gives only a 1%
Jack> increase in pystones?
Maybe compilation flags.
Skip
___
Pythonmac-SIG maillist - Pythonmac-SIG@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/pythonmac-sig
Hmm - that appears to be negligible if not within the bounds of
statistical error. However, you're right - a small bump in speed.
A Quick Aside:
Benchmarking the diff routines on my app (Changes - http://changesapp.com/)
showed a 10-15% performance increase going from 32-bit i386 to 64-
bit
On 20-Jan-2008, at 20:53 , [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>Daniel> I am assuming the GIL is limiting threading and therefore
> I am
>Daniel> really running on one or two cores--hence the tangible
>Daniel> improvement is just CPU speed: from 2.33 GHz to 3.0 GHz
> and a
>Daniel> bit o
Ian> It would be interesting to see if that held up on ppc64. My guess
Ian> is that it would benchmark slower in 64-bit mode than 32-bit mode
Ian> on ppc.
I added a pystone entry to the table for my G5 with the Python 2.6a0
interpreter compiled with -fast -fPIC -fwrapv. I saw a reaso
It would be interesting to see if that held up on ppc64. My guess is
that it would benchmark slower in 64-bit mode than 32-bit mode on ppc.
- Ian
On Jan 20, 2008, at 2:27 AM, Ronald Oussoren wrote:
>
> On 19 Jan, 2008, at 21:43, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>>
>> My Powerbook G4 is getting rathe
On 20-Jan-2008, at 19:23 , Daniel Lord wrote:
> I ran the test on my 1st Gen Quad Core ( 2 x Quad-core 3.0 GHz, 13GB
> RAM) and was a bit surprised to see little improvement over the Core
> Duo numbers.
>
> 63019.7 pystones/second
>
> I am assuming the GIL is limiting threading and therefore I
Daniel> I am assuming the GIL is limiting threading and therefore I am
Daniel> really running on one or two cores--hence the tangible
Daniel> improvement is just CPU speed: from 2.33 GHz to 3.0 GHz and a
Daniel> bit of the memory bandwidth increase as well.
The GIL doesn't enter in
I ran the test on my 1st Gen Quad Core ( 2 x Quad-core 3.0 GHz, 13GB
RAM) and was a bit surprised to see little improvement over the Core
Duo numbers.
63019.7 pystones/second
I am assuming the GIL is limiting threading and therefore I am really
running on one or two cores--hence the tang
Am 2008-01-19 um 21:43 schrieb [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> If you could help by adding some rows to the table, especially for
> current
> MacBook, MacBook Pro or (in the near future, MacBook Air) models, I'd
> appreciate it.
I guess it doesn't really matter, but my trusty old steam powered
G4/400 on
On 20 Jan, 2008, at 16:27, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Ronald> What is interesting though is the difference between 32-
bit and
Ronald> 64-bit code:
Ronald> Python 2.5.2a0 (60124)
Ronald> 32-bit: 52083
Ronald> 64-bit: 60871
Ronald> 64-bit code is significantly faster here (al
Ronald> What is interesting though is the difference between 32-bit and
Ronald> 64-bit code:
Ronald> Python 2.5.2a0 (60124)
Ronald> 32-bit: 52083
Ronald> 64-bit: 60871
Ronald> 64-bit code is significantly faster here (all of this on a
Ronald> MacBook Pro 2.33Ghz/3GByt
On 19 Jan, 2008, at 21:43, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
My Powerbook G4 is getting rather long-in-the-tooth. It's display is
starting to act up, so I think I'm going to buy a new Mac something
in the
fairly near future, but I'm not yet sure what. To that end, I've
started a
table of pystone
My Powerbook G4 is getting rather long-in-the-tooth. It's display is
starting to act up, so I think I'm going to buy a new Mac something in the
fairly near future, but I'm not yet sure what. To that end, I've started a
table of pystone numbers for Macs on the Python wiki:
http://wiki.python
20 matches
Mail list logo
