fasta benchmark ≈240MB N=25,000,000

Each chart bar shows how many times more Memory, one ↓ fasta 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.

    sortsort sort
  ×   Program Source Code CPU secs Elapsed secs Memory KB Code B ≈ CPU Load
1.0Pascal Free Pascal #4 7.937.9381112  0% 100% 1% 0%
32Fortran Intel 6.346.352521155  0% 0% 1% 100%
33Fortran Intel #4 3.183.192601327  0% 0% 2% 100%
36C gcc 7.047.042841185  0% 100% 0% 1%
36C gcc #4 5.055.052841221  1% 100% 1% 1%
36C gcc #5 3.293.292841261  2% 1% 1% 100%
36C++ g++ #4 6.566.562841266  0% 0% 1% 100%
66Fortran Intel #3 4.544.555241190  0% 0% 1% 100%
78C++ g++ 4.744.756201033  0% 100% 1% 2%
78C++ g++ #2 4.284.286201105  0% 100% 0% 1%
97Go 16.4516.457721036  0% 0% 100% 1%
109C++ g++ #3 4.214.228721286  0% 100% 0% 1%
151Ada 2005 GNAT #5 4.244.241,2082186  0% 1% 1% 100%
151Ada 2005 GNAT 9.099.101,2081346  1% 0% 100% 1%
207OCaml #3 12.1612.171,6561042  1% 0% 1% 100%
285Perl #4 5 min5 min2,280934  1% 0% 100% 1%
285Perl #2 7 min7 min2,280886  62% 0% 38% 0%
308Haskell GHC #2 3.943.662,464979  4% 100% 3% 4%
324PHP #3 148.94152.272,5881030  42% 27% 10% 21%
324PHP #2 6 min6 min2,5921006  39% 13% 5% 45%
541Python 3 #2 241.56246.324,324788  30% 24% 15% 33%
541Python 3 248.61253.034,324792  22% 24% 25% 31%
661Ruby #5 217.79221.465,284987  36% 18% 33% 15%
692Lisp SBCL #3 11.6311.645,5361579  0% 1% 100% 0%
723Lisp SBCL #6 8.018.025,7801751  1% 1% 0% 100%
1,082Erlang HiPE 95.1095.128,6561039  99% 0% 2% 0%
1,099Erlang HiPE #2 49.7449.758,7881164  0% 100% 0% 1%
2,046Racket 50.6350.6216,3641054  0% 1% 100% 0%
2,056Java  #4 5.135.0516,4441507  2% 1% 1% 100%
2,089Java  #2 7.927.8216,7121240  54% 1% 46% 1%
2,208Racket #3 13.9013.9117,6601276  0% 0% 100% 0%
2,349Dart 9.459.3818,7881386  1% 1% 100% 1%
2,482C# Mono #2 7.507.5119,8521180  0% 1% 100% 0%
2,547Scala #3 6.526.4120,3721053  91% 1% 11% 1%
2,561Scala 10.3910.2620,4841080  1% 85% 1% 16%
2,721F# Mono 10.5010.5121,768978  100% 1% 0% 0%
2,902Lisp SBCL #2 16.2216.2323,2121617  1% 0% 0% 100%
2,904Lisp SBCL 14.7414.7523,2281419  1% 0% 0% 100%
3,686Java  #5 5.341.7229,4842457  69% 75% 73% 96%
5,475C# Mono #4 9.949.9543,8001505  1% 91% 1% 9%
6,276Clojure #6 11.049.7050,2081653  25% 79% 6% 5%
6,721Clojure #5 12.6111.1453,7641839  75% 23% 10% 6%
12,495Perl 116.40116.4599,960838  0% 94% 0% 7%
22,020Ruby #2 270.96271.73176,156732  1% 59% 1% 41%
23,798Ruby #4 218.28221.88190,380904  21% 34% 23% 25%
76,600Ruby JRuby 246.02241.84612,796760  23% 37% 31% 16%
Haskell GHC #4 Bad Output1413
Haskell GHC Bad Output1421
OCaml #6 Failed1161
"wrong" (different) algorithm / less comparable programs
50C gcc #2 2.462.464001169
243Haskell GHC #3 12.5911.571,9401408
1,914Perl #5 2.302.3015,3081113
missing benchmark programs
Rust No program

 fasta benchmark : Generate and write random DNA sequences

diff program output N = 1000 with this 10KB 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

We'll use the generated FASTA file as input for other benchmarks (reverse-complement, k-nucleotide).

Random DNA sequences can be based on a variety of Random Models (554KB pdf). You can use Markov chains or independently distributed nucleotides to generate random DNA sequences online.

Revised BSD license

  Home   Conclusions   License   Play