Exupery 0.10 is now released. There are prebuilt VM's available for both Windows and Linux. This release now provides a measurable speed improvement for the compilerBenchmark macro benchmark due to work on dynamic primitive inlining. Instructions for installation and a link to a pre-built image is here: http://minnow.cc.gatech.edu/squeak/3945 Benchmarks on my Athlon 64 3500+ ========================================================= arithmaticLoopBenchmark 1398 compiled 92 ratio: 15.196 bytecodeBenchmark 2134 compiled 469 ratio: 4.550 sendBenchmark 1580 compiled 697 ratio: 2.267 doLoopsBenchmark 1090 compiled 840 ratio: 1.298 largeExplorers 334 compiled 358 ratio: 0.933 compilerBenchmark 733 compiled 705 ratio: 1.040 Cumulative Time 4167 compiled 1448 ratio 2.878 1,067,222,511 bytecodes/sec; 16,716,421 sends/sec Benchmarks on Andy's Mobile Pentium 3 ========================================================= arithmaticLoopBenchmark 2487 compiled 285 ratio: 8.726 bytecodeBenchmark 4271 compiled 1255 ratio: 3.403 sendBenchmark 3482 compiled 1772 ratio: 1.965 doLoopsBenchmark 2078 compiled 1663 ratio: 1.250 largeExplorers 2224 compiled 1683 ratio: 1.321 compilerBenchmark 2093 compiled 1712 ratio: 1.223 Cumulative Time 12903 compiled 4971 ratio 2.596 Benchmarks from my Pentium-M laptop ========================================================= arithmaticLoopBenchmark 1003 compiled 191 ratio: 5.251 bytecodeBenchmark 1773 compiled 683 ratio: 2.596 sendBenchmark 1446 compiled 922 ratio: 1.568 doLoopsBenchmark 991 compiled 918 ratio: 1.080 largeExplorers 418 compiled 441 ratio: 0.948 compilerBenchmark 718 compiled 683 ratio: 1.051 Cumulative Time 3773 compiled 2015 ratio 1.872 It's interesting that on Andy's machine Exupery is providing a nice performance improvement for largeExplorers while on my machine there is a 7% performance loss. The loss is due to the interpreter inlining Point>>@ into the main interpreter loop while Exupery executes it as a normal primitive. Andy's benchmarks are promising enough for a 1.0, pity relative performance isn't so high on the other two machines. There is a mailing list for those interested in the project here: http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/exupery Many thanks to Andy Tween for doing the Windows port and building the official Windows VM. Thanks also to Patrick Mauritz for doing a Solaris x86 port which was the first OS port. Bryce _______________________________________________ Exupery mailing list [hidden email] http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/exupery |
First of all - let me thank you to the work you have done, Bruce!
I have tested Exupery with provided image on 3 different machines. And here are the numbers: 1) Intel Pentium 4 Mobile 1.8 GHz (Win VM) - look at doLoopsBenchmark results! arithmaticLoopBenchmark 2097 compiled 158 ratio: 13.272 bytecodeBenchmark 2958 compiled 619 ratio: 4.778 sendBenchmark 2718 compiled 1874 ratio: 1.449 doLoopsBenchmark 1647 compiled 2965 ratio: 0.555 largeExplorers 1156 compiled 1166 ratio: 0.991 compilerBenchmark 1082 compiled 1085 ratio: 0.997 Cumulative Time 8093.659 compiled 3693.635 ratio 2.190 2) AMD Sempron 3100+ 1.8GHz (Win VM) - this one was born to run Exupery :) arithmaticLoopBenchmark 1708 compiled 113 ratio: 15.115 bytecodeBenchmark 2505 compiled 545 ratio: 4.596 sendBenchmark 1871 compiled 841 ratio: 2.225 doLoopsBenchmark 1203 compiled 809 ratio: 1.487 largeExplorers 704 compiled 458 ratio: 1.536 compilerBenchmark 701 compiled 774 ratio: 0.906 Cumulative Time 5437.323 compiled 1715.399 ratio 3.169 3) Intel Pentium Celeron 2000+ arithmaticLoopBenchmark 1862 compiled 125 ratio: 14.896 bytecodeBenchmark 3115 compiled 732 ratio: 4.254 sendBenchmark 2130 compiled 973 ratio: 2.189 doLoopsBenchmark 1453 compiled 940 ratio: 1.546 largeExplorers 872 compiled 832 ratio: 1.048 compilerBenchmark 1078 compiled 1043 ratio: 1.034 Cumulative Time 7005.573 compiled 2356.208 ratio 2.972 Note: .tz extension means tar gzip format? If yes then having .tgz or .tar.gz extension allows easier extraction in more tools (Total Commander doesn't understand .tz, in WinZip and IZArc I had to rename ungzipped file, etc.) Bye! Jakub On 11/15/06, [hidden email] <[hidden email]> wrote: > > Exupery 0.10 is now released. There are prebuilt VM's available for > both Windows and Linux. This release now provides a measurable speed > improvement for the compilerBenchmark macro benchmark due to work on > dynamic primitive inlining. > > Instructions for installation and a link to a pre-built image is > here: > > http://minnow.cc.gatech.edu/squeak/3945 > > > Benchmarks on my Athlon 64 3500+ > ========================================================= > arithmaticLoopBenchmark 1398 compiled 92 ratio: 15.196 > bytecodeBenchmark 2134 compiled 469 ratio: 4.550 > sendBenchmark 1580 compiled 697 ratio: 2.267 > doLoopsBenchmark 1090 compiled 840 ratio: 1.298 > largeExplorers 334 compiled 358 ratio: 0.933 > compilerBenchmark 733 compiled 705 ratio: 1.040 > Cumulative Time 4167 compiled 1448 ratio 2.878 > > 1,067,222,511 bytecodes/sec; 16,716,421 sends/sec > > Benchmarks on Andy's Mobile Pentium 3 > ========================================================= > arithmaticLoopBenchmark 2487 compiled 285 ratio: 8.726 > bytecodeBenchmark 4271 compiled 1255 ratio: 3.403 > sendBenchmark 3482 compiled 1772 ratio: 1.965 > doLoopsBenchmark 2078 compiled 1663 ratio: 1.250 > largeExplorers 2224 compiled 1683 ratio: 1.321 > compilerBenchmark 2093 compiled 1712 ratio: 1.223 > Cumulative Time 12903 compiled 4971 ratio 2.596 > > Benchmarks from my Pentium-M laptop > ========================================================= > arithmaticLoopBenchmark 1003 compiled 191 ratio: 5.251 > bytecodeBenchmark 1773 compiled 683 ratio: 2.596 > sendBenchmark 1446 compiled 922 ratio: 1.568 > doLoopsBenchmark 991 compiled 918 ratio: 1.080 > largeExplorers 418 compiled 441 ratio: 0.948 > compilerBenchmark 718 compiled 683 ratio: 1.051 > Cumulative Time 3773 compiled 2015 ratio 1.872 > > It's interesting that on Andy's machine Exupery is providing a nice > performance improvement for largeExplorers while on my machine there > is a 7% performance loss. The loss is due to the interpreter inlining > Point>>@ into the main interpreter loop while Exupery executes it as > a normal primitive. Andy's benchmarks are promising enough for a 1.0, > pity relative performance isn't so high on the other two machines. > > There is a mailing list for those interested in the project here: > > http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/exupery > > Many thanks to Andy Tween for doing the Windows port and building > the official Windows VM. Thanks also to Patrick Mauritz for doing > a Solaris x86 port which was the first OS port. > > Bryce > _______________________________________________ > Exupery mailing list > [hidden email] > http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/exupery > Exupery mailing list [hidden email] http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/exupery |
Errata:
3) AMD Athlon XP 2000+ (erm, screwed it a lot ... not using it very frequently O:) On 11/16/06, Jakub Kozisek <[hidden email]> wrote: > First of all - let me thank you to the work you have done, Bruce! > > I have tested Exupery with provided image on 3 different machines. And > here are the numbers: > > 1) Intel Pentium 4 Mobile 1.8 GHz (Win VM) - look at doLoopsBenchmark results! > > arithmaticLoopBenchmark 2097 compiled 158 ratio: 13.272 > bytecodeBenchmark 2958 compiled 619 ratio: 4.778 > sendBenchmark 2718 compiled 1874 ratio: 1.449 > doLoopsBenchmark 1647 compiled 2965 ratio: 0.555 > largeExplorers 1156 compiled 1166 ratio: 0.991 > compilerBenchmark 1082 compiled 1085 ratio: 0.997 > Cumulative Time 8093.659 compiled 3693.635 ratio 2.190 > > 2) AMD Sempron 3100+ 1.8GHz (Win VM) - this one was born to run Exupery :) > > arithmaticLoopBenchmark 1708 compiled 113 ratio: 15.115 > bytecodeBenchmark 2505 compiled 545 ratio: 4.596 > sendBenchmark 1871 compiled 841 ratio: 2.225 > doLoopsBenchmark 1203 compiled 809 ratio: 1.487 > largeExplorers 704 compiled 458 ratio: 1.536 > compilerBenchmark 701 compiled 774 ratio: 0.906 > Cumulative Time 5437.323 compiled 1715.399 ratio 3.169 > > 3) Intel Pentium Celeron 2000+ > > arithmaticLoopBenchmark 1862 compiled 125 ratio: 14.896 > bytecodeBenchmark 3115 compiled 732 ratio: 4.254 > sendBenchmark 2130 compiled 973 ratio: 2.189 > doLoopsBenchmark 1453 compiled 940 ratio: 1.546 > largeExplorers 872 compiled 832 ratio: 1.048 > compilerBenchmark 1078 compiled 1043 ratio: 1.034 > Cumulative Time 7005.573 compiled 2356.208 ratio 2.972 > > Note: .tz extension means tar gzip format? If yes then having .tgz or > .tar.gz extension allows easier extraction in more tools (Total > Commander doesn't understand .tz, in WinZip and IZArc I had to rename > ungzipped file, etc.) > > Bye! > > Jakub > > On 11/15/06, [hidden email] <[hidden email]> wrote: > > > > Exupery 0.10 is now released. There are prebuilt VM's available for > > both Windows and Linux. This release now provides a measurable speed > > improvement for the compilerBenchmark macro benchmark due to work on > > dynamic primitive inlining. > > > > Instructions for installation and a link to a pre-built image is > > here: > > > > http://minnow.cc.gatech.edu/squeak/3945 > > > > > > Benchmarks on my Athlon 64 3500+ > > ========================================================= > > arithmaticLoopBenchmark 1398 compiled 92 ratio: 15.196 > > bytecodeBenchmark 2134 compiled 469 ratio: 4.550 > > sendBenchmark 1580 compiled 697 ratio: 2.267 > > doLoopsBenchmark 1090 compiled 840 ratio: 1.298 > > largeExplorers 334 compiled 358 ratio: 0.933 > > compilerBenchmark 733 compiled 705 ratio: 1.040 > > Cumulative Time 4167 compiled 1448 ratio 2.878 > > > > 1,067,222,511 bytecodes/sec; 16,716,421 sends/sec > > > > Benchmarks on Andy's Mobile Pentium 3 > > ========================================================= > > arithmaticLoopBenchmark 2487 compiled 285 ratio: 8.726 > > bytecodeBenchmark 4271 compiled 1255 ratio: 3.403 > > sendBenchmark 3482 compiled 1772 ratio: 1.965 > > doLoopsBenchmark 2078 compiled 1663 ratio: 1.250 > > largeExplorers 2224 compiled 1683 ratio: 1.321 > > compilerBenchmark 2093 compiled 1712 ratio: 1.223 > > Cumulative Time 12903 compiled 4971 ratio 2.596 > > > > Benchmarks from my Pentium-M laptop > > ========================================================= > > arithmaticLoopBenchmark 1003 compiled 191 ratio: 5.251 > > bytecodeBenchmark 1773 compiled 683 ratio: 2.596 > > sendBenchmark 1446 compiled 922 ratio: 1.568 > > doLoopsBenchmark 991 compiled 918 ratio: 1.080 > > largeExplorers 418 compiled 441 ratio: 0.948 > > compilerBenchmark 718 compiled 683 ratio: 1.051 > > Cumulative Time 3773 compiled 2015 ratio 1.872 > > > > It's interesting that on Andy's machine Exupery is providing a nice > > performance improvement for largeExplorers while on my machine there > > is a 7% performance loss. The loss is due to the interpreter inlining > > Point>>@ into the main interpreter loop while Exupery executes it as > > a normal primitive. Andy's benchmarks are promising enough for a 1.0, > > pity relative performance isn't so high on the other two machines. > > > > There is a mailing list for those interested in the project here: > > > > http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/exupery > > > > Many thanks to Andy Tween for doing the Windows port and building > > the official Windows VM. Thanks also to Patrick Mauritz for doing > > a Solaris x86 port which was the first OS port. > > > > Bryce > > _______________________________________________ > > Exupery mailing list > > [hidden email] > > http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/exupery > > > Exupery mailing list [hidden email] http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/exupery |
Free forum by Nabble | Edit this page |