Author: Maciej Fijalkowski <fij...@gmail.com> Branch: extradoc Changeset: r4194:f1cb993277b4 Date: 2012-04-17 18:50 +0200 http://bitbucket.org/pypy/extradoc/changeset/f1cb993277b4/
Log: finish the blog post diff --git a/blog/draft/numpy-status-update-3.rst b/blog/draft/numpy-status-update-3.rst --- a/blog/draft/numpy-status-update-3.rst +++ b/blog/draft/numpy-status-update-3.rst @@ -35,7 +35,22 @@ float single-dimension numpy arrays. However, results are encouraging, given that our assembler generator is far from ideal: - + + +---------------+----------+----------+------+----------------+------------+ + | | Numpy | PyPy SSE | PyPy | GCC non-looped | GCC looped | + +---------------+----------+----------+------+----------------+------------+ + | ``a+b`` | 0.6s | 0.3s | 0.4s | 0.3s | 0.25s | + +---------------+----------+----------+------+----------------+------------+ + | ``a+b+c`` | 1.9s | 0.35s | 0.5s | 0.7s | 0.32s | + +---------------+----------+----------+------+----------------+------------+ + | ``a+b+c+d+e`` | 3.2s | 0.36s | 0.8s | 1.7s | 0.51s | + +---------------+----------+----------+------+----------------+------------+ + + The `benchmark repo`_ is available. GCC was run with ``-O3``, no further + options specified. PyPy was run with default options, the SSE branch is under + ``backend-vector-ops``, but **it's not working completely** yet. + + One might argue that C and Python is not the same code - indeed it is not. + It just shows some possible approach to writing numeric code. Next step would be to just continue implementing missing features such as @@ -49,3 +64,4 @@ .. _`pycon`: http://us.pycon.org .. _`numpypy status page`: http://buildbot.pypy.org/numpy-status/latest.html +.. _`benchmark repo`: https://bitbucket.org/fijal/hack2/src/fa3119d8ade6/bench/numeric _______________________________________________ pypy-commit mailing list pypy-commit@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/pypy-commit
