Ubuntu : Intel® Q6600® one core
Computer Language Benchmarks Game      [[ Play ]]

- all benchmarks - n-body fannkuch-redux meteor-contest fasta fasta-redux spectral-norm reverse-complement mandelbrot k-nucleotide regex-dna pidigits chameneos-redux thread-ring binary-trees-redux binary-trees - all languages - Ada 2005 GNAT ATS C CINT C gcc Clojure C# Mono C++ g++ Dart Erlang HiPE F# Mono Fortran Intel Go Haskell GHC Java 7 JavaScript V8 Lisp SBCL Lua OCaml Pascal Free Pascal Perl PHP Python 3 Racket Ruby 2.0 Ruby JRuby Scala Smalltalk VisualWorks

÷ Ada 2005 GNAT ATS C CINT C gcc Clojure C# Mono C++ g++ Dart Erlang HiPE F# Mono Fortran Intel Go Haskell GHC Java 7 JavaScript V8 Lisp SBCL Lua OCaml Pascal Free Pascal Perl PHP Python 3 Racket Ruby 2.0 Ruby JRuby Scala Smalltalk VisualWorks x86 one core x64 quad-core x86 quad-core x64 one core

 1 : Are the programs faster? At a glance.

Each chart bar shows, for one unidentified benchmark, how much the fastest program used compared to the fastest Ruby 2.0 program.

These are not the only compilers and interpreters. These are not the only programs that could be written. These are not the only tasks that could be solved. These are just 10 tiny examples.

 2 : Are the programs faster? Approximately.

Each table row shows, for one named benchmark, how much the fastest program used compared to the fastest Ruby 2.0 program.

used what fraction? used how many times more?
Benchmark	Time	Memory	Code

used what fraction? used how many times more?
Time-used	|-	|---	25%	median	75%	---|	-|
(Elapsed secs)

± read the measurements and then read the program source code.

 3 : Are the programs faster? Measurements.

These are not the only tasks that could be solved. These are just 10 tiny examples. These are not the only compilers and interpreters. These are not the only programs that could be written.

For each named benchmark, measurements of the fastest program are shown for comparison against measurements of the fastest Ruby 2.0 program.

Program Source Code	CPU secs	Elapsed secs	Memory KB	Code B	≈ CPU Load
n-body
	No program
Ruby 2.0	15.93	15.93	4,880	1137	0% 0% 1% 100%
spectral-norm
	No program
Ruby 2.0	7.10	7.78	20,148	828	0% 1% 0% 100%
fannkuch-redux
	No program
Ruby 2.0	21.37	21.38	4,864	384	0% 0% 1% 100%
regex-dna
	No program
Ruby 2.0	0.47	0.49	6,336	417	0% 0% 2% 100%
fasta
	No program
Ruby 2.0	1.98	1.99	5,924	772	0% 0% 3% 100%
binary-trees
	No program
Ruby 2.0	0.59	0.59	4,864	439	0% 0% 2% 100%
k-nucleotide
	No program
Ruby 2.0	7.90	7.90	46,772	420	0% 0% 0% 100%
pidigits
	No program
Ruby 2.0	0.55	0.56	38,716	653	2% 0% 2% 98%
mandelbrot
	No program
Ruby 2.0	18.87	18.88	4,868	307	0% 0% 0% 100%
reverse-complement
	No program
Ruby 2.0	0.14	0.17	?	255	6% 0% 0% 94%
fasta-redux
	No programs

 4 : Are there other programs for these benchmarks?

Remember - those are just the fastest and Ruby 2.0 programs measured on this OS/machine. Check if there are other implementations of these benchmark programs for .

Ada 2005 GNAT ATS C CINT C gcc Clojure C# Mono C++ g++ Dart Erlang HiPE F# Mono Fortran Intel Go Haskell GHC Java 7 JavaScript V8 Lisp SBCL Lua OCaml Pascal Free Pascal Perl PHP Python 3 Racket Ruby 2.0 Ruby JRuby Scala Smalltalk VisualWorks

Maybe one of those other programs is fastest on a different OS/machine.

 5 : Are there other faster programs for these benchmarks?

Remember - those are just the fastest and Ruby 2.0 programs measured on this OS/machine. Check if there are faster implementations of these benchmark programs for other programming languages.

n-body fannkuch-redux meteor-contest fasta fasta-redux spectral-norm reverse-complement mandelbrot k-nucleotide regex-dna pidigits chameneos-redux thread-ring binary-trees-redux binary-trees

Maybe one of those other programs is fastest on a different OS/machine.

  :  

 

  Home   Conclusions   License   Play