[Python-Dev] tuning up... (original) (raw)
Andrew MacIntyre andymac@bullseye.apana.org.au
Mon, 24 Feb 2003 20:38:14 +1000 (est)
- Previous message: [Python-Dev] tuning up...
- Next message: [Python-Dev] tuning up...
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
On Sun, 23 Feb 2003, Guido van Rossum wrote:
> I've just put together a binary distribution of 2.3a2 for OS/2 EMX, and > for the hell of it compared the pystone ratings of 2.3a2 against 2.2.2 > on 2 different systems. > > Results: > 2.2.2 2.3a2 change > system 1 18200 21700 +19.2% > system 2a 5600 6975 +24.5% > system 2b 6600 8540 +29.4% > > (Pystone on 2.2.2 adjusted to 50000 loops, average of 3 runs) > > Hardware: > system 1: Athlon 1.4GHz, 512MB (PC133), OS/2 v4.0 FP12, gcc 2.8.1 -O2 > system 2a: Via C3 800MHz, 256MB (PC133), OS/2 v4.0 FP15, gcc 2.8.1 -O2 > system 2b: " , " , FreeBSD 4.7, gcc 2.95.4 -g -O3
About 10% of the improvement is due to the removal of SETLINENO opcodes; to remove this effect, you should compare python2.2 -O to python2.3.
Ok, for completeness, these are the -O times:
2.2.2 2.3a2 change
system 1 20000 21650 +8.2% system 2a 6100 6990 +14.5% system 2b 7170 8620 +20.2%
Your 10% claim wasn't far off!
I'm still somewhat intrigued by the difference between the systems - IIRC the C3 CPU has only 64kB of cache, so may be some of the gains are related to better cache locality (at least for pystone) which is less obvious on CPUs with more cache.
-- Andrew I MacIntyre "These thoughts are mine alone..." E-mail: andymac@bullseye.apana.org.au | Snail: PO Box 370 andymac@pcug.org.au | Belconnen ACT 2616 Web: http://www.andymac.org/ | Australia
- Previous message: [Python-Dev] tuning up...
- Next message: [Python-Dev] tuning up...
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]