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 x86 one core x64 quad-core x86 quad-core x64 one core

 mandelbrot benchmark N=16,000

Each chart bar shows how many times more Memory, one ↓ mandelbrot program used, compared to the program that used least Memory.

These are not the only programs that could be written. These are not the only compilers and interpreters. These are not the only programming languages.

Column × shows how many times more each program used compared to the benchmark program that used least.

		sort	sort		sort
×	Program Source Code	CPU secs	Elapsed secs	Memory KB	Code B	≈ CPU Load
1.0	Pascal Free Pascal #3	78.74	78.76	8	530	0% 0% 0% 100%
40	ATS #2	26.17	26.18	320	1455	0% 0% 0% 100%
41	C gcc #2	51.04	51.07	324	400	0% 0% 0% 100%
103	Lua #2	13 min	13 min	820	367	0% 0% 0% 100%
109	C++ g++ #3	221.82	222.07	868	414	0% 1% 0% 100%
121	Ada 2005 GNAT #2	58.07	58.10	964	572	0% 0% 0% 100%
131	Lua	13 min	13 min	1,044	353	0% 0% 0% 100%
205	OCaml #6	150.49	150.53	1,636	444	0% 0% 0% 100%
249	Perl #3	52 min	52 min	1,992	370	0% 1% 0% 100%
384	PHP	43 min	43 min	3,072	443	1% 0% 0% 100%
498	OCaml	85.71	85.86	3,984	710	0% 0% 0% 100%
608	C CINT #2	1h 32 min	1h 32 min	4,860	400	0% 0% 0% 100%
608	Ruby 2.0 #3	1h 20 min	1h 20 min	4,864	307	0% 0% 0% 100%
812	Python 3 #5	41 min	46 min	6,496	449	1% 0% 0% 100%
844	Python 3 #2	30 min	32 min	6,748	777	1% 0% 0% 100%
1,734	C# Mono #2	57.44	57.45	13,868	484	1% 0% 0% 100%
1,799	Java 7	42.83	42.84	14,392	665	1% 0% 0% 100%
1,864	Racket	107.46	107.50	14,908	517	0% 0% 0% 100%
1,908	Racket #2	96.28	96.32	15,260	585	0% 0% 0% 100%
2,061	Racket #3	80.02	80.05	16,488	797	0% 0% 0% 100%
2,108	F# Mono #2	188.54	188.60	16,860	1043	1% 0% 0% 100%
2,224	Scala #2	56.01	56.03	17,792	454	0% 0% 0% 100%
2,777	Smalltalk VisualWorks #2	12 min	12 min	22,216	467	0% 0% 0% 100%
3,054	Lua #6	13 min	13 min	24,428	623	0% 0% 0% 100%
3,568	C gcc #6	23.69	23.71	28,540	879	0% 0% 0% 100%
3,699	C gcc	23.96	23.98	29,592	822	0% 0% 0% 100%
3,715	Ada 2005 GNAT #3	24.81	24.84	29,720	1805	0% 1% 1% 100%
3,769	ATS	24.65	24.66	30,148	2148	0% 0% 0% 100%
3,804	C gcc #4	23.22	23.23	30,432	799	0% 0% 0% 100%
3,900	Pascal Free Pascal #4	240.09	240.15	31,200	748	0% 0% 0% 100%
3,910	Fortran Intel #6	13.98	13.99	31,280	967	0% 0% 1% 100%
3,945	Go #6	48.66	48.68	31,556	700	0% 0% 0% 100%
3,967	C gcc #3	23.44	23.45	31,736	763	0% 0% 0% 100%
3,970	C++ g++ #6	27.30	27.32	31,756	1035	0% 0% 0% 100%
3,987	Pascal Free Pascal	83.71	83.74	31,896	820	0% 0% 0% 100%
3,987	Pascal Free Pascal #2	83.70	83.72	31,896	817	0% 0% 0% 100%
4,003	C++ g++ #5	23.56	23.57	32,024	590	0% 0% 0% 100%
4,003	C++ g++ #2	35.48	35.50	32,024	687	0% 0% 0% 100%
4,009	C++ g++ #9	19.58	19.60	32,072	726	0% 0% 0% 100%
4,010	C++ g++ #7	23.70	23.71	32,076	1017	0% 0% 0% 100%
4,010	C++ g++ #8	20.21	20.22	32,076	742	0% 1% 0% 100%
4,076	Fortran Intel #5	56.45	56.46	32,604	508	0% 0% 0% 100%
4,421	Haskell GHC #2	43.96	43.98	35,364	782	0% 0% 0% 100%
4,477	Lisp SBCL #3	75.57	75.59	35,812	888	0% 0% 0% 100%
4,501	Lisp SBCL	67.12	67.14	36,004	2459	0% 0% 0% 100%
5,944	C# Mono	45.88	45.89	47,552	798	0% 0% 0% 100%
5,960	C# Mono #3	45.25	45.26	47,676	701	0% 0% 0% 100%
6,058	F# Mono #3	47.56	47.57	48,464	800	0% 0% 0% 100%
6,242	Scala	48.22	48.24	49,932	724	0% 0% 0% 100%
6,344	Racket #4	78.27	78.30	50,748	796	0% 0% 0% 100%
7,234	Fortran Intel #4	47.34	47.35	57,868	611	0% 0% 0% 100%
8,060	Ruby 2.0 #2	1h 44 min	1h 44 min	64,480	925	0% 0% 0% 100%
8,458	Java 7  #6	29.24	29.25	67,664	802	0% 1% 0% 100%
8,485	Java 7  #3	42.10	42.11	67,876	903	1% 0% 0% 100%
8,485	Java 7  #2	26.92	26.93	67,880	796	0% 0% 0% 100%
13,506	PHP #3	23 min	23 min	108,044	863	0% 0% 0% 100%
13,564	Clojure #5	63.57	63.60	108,512	1069	0% 0% 0% 100%
14,315	Clojure #6	67.40	67.43	114,516	1069	2% 2% 1% 100%
24,432	Scala #4	28.01	28.03	195,456	786	0% 0% 0% 100%
25,216	Dart	88.87	88.90	201,728	809	0% 0% 0% 100%
73,073	Ruby JRuby #3	16 min	16 min	584,584	307	0% 0% 1% 100%
79,364	Erlang HiPE	6 min	6 min	634,912	534	0% 0% 0% 100%
86,299	Ruby JRuby #2	30 min	30 min	690,392	925	0% 0% 0% 100%
	Fortran Intel	Bad Output			485
	Fortran Intel #3	Bad Output			754
	Fortran Intel #2	Bad Output			813
	JavaScript V8 #2	Bad Output			353
	Perl #4	Failed			592
	Python 3 #3	Failed			304
	Scala #3	Failed			796
"wrong" (different) algorithm / less comparable programs
1,987	C gcc #5	7.10	7.11	15,896	1026
3,647	C++ g++	12.32	12.33	29,172	1239
5,697	Python 3 #6	139.47	139.59	45,576	1380

 mandelbrot benchmark : Generate Mandelbrot set portable bitmap file

cmp program output N = 200 with this 5KB output file to check your program is correct before contributing.

We are trying to show the performance of various programming language implementations - so we ask that contributed programs not only give the correct result, but also use the same algorithm to calculate that result.

Each program should plot the Mandelbrot set [-1.5-i,0.5+i] on an N-by-N bitmap. Write output byte-by-byte in portable bitmap format.

For more information see Eric W. Weisstein, "Mandelbrot Set." From MathWorld--A Wolfram Web Resource.
http://mathworld.wolfram.com/MandelbrotSet.html

Thanks to Greg Buchholz for this benchmark.

  Home   Conclusions   License   Play