All, I posted the new stability and runtime performance benchmarks at:
http://code.google.com/p/java-matrix-benchmark This includes the 2.1a SVN code from last Friday. I don't really see much of a change since 2.0. If a commons-math developer has some time it would be helpful if he/she/it could take a look at: jmbench.impl.runtime.McBrAlgorithmFactory.java and tell me if I'm testing commons-math correctly. - Peter On Sat, Jan 30, 2010 at 1:58 AM, Ted Dunning <[email protected]> wrote: > This comparison is also confounded by the fact that most C++ libraries try > to make use of native binary libraries such as ATLAS and often get a > dramatic speedup as a result. > > On Fri, Jan 29, 2010 at 4:55 PM, Peter Abeles <[email protected] > >wrote: > > > I have seen some adhoc comparisons on-line. Mostly just matrix multiply. > > Having said that I wouldn't be surprised if I missed something. Based > > on personal experience I would expect about a 2-3 times speed hit > > between well written java and c/c++ code because of array overhead and > > language constraints. For pure arithmetic I have gotten nearly > > identical performance. > > > > > > -- > Ted Dunning, CTO > DeepDyve > -- "Now, now my good man, this is no time for making enemies." — Voltaire (1694-1778), on his deathbed in response to a priest asking that he renounce Satan.
