SIMD version of SFMT is 3 to 7 time faster than MT. See http://www.math.sci.hiroshima-u.ac.jp/~m-mat/MT/SFMT/speed.html for detail.
Hideki Don Dailey: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: >On Thu, 2008-10-09 at 15:20 -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >> Computers + random = can of worms. > >Has anyone seen this: > > http://home.southernct.edu/~pasqualonia1/ca/report.html#files > >They are claiming impressive speed and high quality for a random number >generator. The code is compact and small, much nicer than mt19937 and >the speed seems to blow mt19937 out of the water. > >I haven't looked at any papers on this and I'm wondering how good it is. > > Here is quote: > > > The cellular automaton outperforms the GSL random number > generators, being more than three times as fast as the GSL > generators. > > The following table shows the mean time for 10 runs of each > generator, with each run producing 10 million integers. Source > code for both the GSL generators and the cellular automaton was > compiled using GCC version 4.1.0 with the -O2 optimization flag. > > RNG: Mean time to produce 10 million integers: > > cellular automaton 0.062000 seconds > gsl_rng_taus 0.200000 seconds > gsl_rng_gfsr4 0.200000 seconds > gsl_rng_mt19937 0.223000 seconds > gsl_rng_ranlxd1 2.652000 seconds > > >- Don >---- inline file >_______________________________________________ >computer-go mailing list >[email protected] >http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/ -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Kato) _______________________________________________ computer-go mailing list [email protected] http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
