mandelbrot benchmark N=16,000

Each chart bar shows how many times slower, one ↓ mandelbrot program was, compared to the fastest program.

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 sortsort
  ×   Program Source Code CPU secs Elapsed secs Memory KB Code B ≈ CPU Load
1.0Rust 20.845.2863,408868  99% 99% 98% 99%
1.1C gcc #4 22.405.6128,988799  100% 100% 100% 100%
1.1C gcc #7 22.905.7532,940994  100% 100% 99% 100%
1.1C++ g++ #7 22.975.7733,5921017  99% 99% 99% 100%
1.2C gcc #3 24.846.2432,424763  100% 100% 100% 100%
1.2C gcc 24.996.2627,752822  100% 100% 100% 100%
1.2C gcc #6 25.096.2827,760879  100% 100% 100% 100%
1.2Rust #2 25.716.5255,4281080  100% 100% 96% 100%
1.3Go #3 27.186.8432,568894  99% 100% 100% 100%
1.3C++ g++ #6 27.596.9332,8881035  100% 100% 100% 100%
1.3Java  #2 27.797.1287,832796  97% 99% 97% 97%
1.4Scala #4 27.687.1592,200786  96% 96% 99% 97%
1.4Java  #6 29.037.4487,332802  99% 97% 97% 97%
1.5C gcc #9 29.637.6932,464694  95% 100% 95% 95%
1.5C# Mono #6 30.737.9374,496986  96% 99% 96% 96%
1.5C++ g++ #9 31.008.0633,444726  95% 95% 95% 100%
1.5Ada 2005 GNAT #3 32.258.1331,7561805  100% 99% 100% 99%
1.5C# Mono #4 31.558.1374,244872  96% 100% 97% 96%
1.8F# Mono #4 36.789.7480,552869  94% 94% 94% 96%
1.9Clojure #7 35.219.79155,7041195  95% 88% 89% 89%
2.0Java  #3 42.4910.8086,168903  98% 98% 98% 100%
2.1Go #2 43.6110.9535,332837  100% 100% 100% 100%
2.2C++ g++ #8 30.9611.4233,504742  100% 100% 37% 36%
2.2C# Mono #3 44.9711.4873,916701  98% 99% 98% 98%
2.2F# Mono #3 45.1211.5876,084800  97% 99% 97% 97%
2.2C# Mono 46.0811.7773,700798  100% 98% 97% 98%
2.3Go #6 48.4012.2033,648700  99% 99% 99% 99%
2.5Scala 50.9812.9660,476724  98% 98% 100% 98%
2.6Haskell GHC #2 55.7313.9734,212782  100% 100% 100% 100%
2.7F# Mono #2 54.0114.4043,4481043  93% 93% 96% 94%
2.9Clojure #6 55.6315.14121,9201077  91% 91% 91% 95%
3.0Scala #5 43.7815.9387,072589  71% 66% 77% 62%
3.6Fortran Intel #4 48.9018.7865,080611  93% 34% 93% 42%
3.7Racket #4 78.0519.7456,712796  99% 100% 99% 99%
3.8Dart 55.2020.2974,896901  86% 50% 39% 99%
4.0OCaml 84.9321.321,740710  100% 100% 100% 100%
4.3Lisp SBCL 80.2722.5562,1762459  79% 99% 79% 100%
4.4Go 93.3923.4535,140823  100% 100% 100% 100%
5.5Lisp SBCL #3 75.4929.0252,724888  33% 95% 38% 95%
6.0Pascal Free Pascal #2 83.6231.4931,948817  95% 36% 41% 95%
6.0Pascal Free Pascal 83.6031.5131,948820  36% 100% 36% 95%
6.4Pascal Free Pascal #5 135.8434.0430,560829  100% 100% 100% 100%
6.5C++ g++ #5 34.1634.1833,220590  0% 0% 0% 100%
7.2C++ g++ #2 38.0538.0633,448687  0% 0% 100% 0%
8.3Java  43.7643.7323,428665  1% 99% 2% 1%
9.5C gcc #2 49.9950.01664400  1% 0% 0% 100%
9.9Clojure #5 53.8552.06100,4161077  34% 51% 1% 19%
10Scala #2 52.5552.4826,496454  1% 68% 2% 31%
10Ada 2005 GNAT #2 53.4753.481,624572  1% 0% 0% 100%
11Fortran Intel #5 56.5956.6132,600508  1% 0% 1% 100%
14Pascal Free Pascal #4 289.8772.5930,980748  100% 100% 100% 100%
15Pascal Free Pascal #3 78.7278.758530  1% 100% 0% 0%
16Racket #3 87.0587.0121,108797  1% 0% 100% 0%
19Racket #2 100.80100.8922,832585  1% 34% 67% 1%
22Racket 118.44118.4423,616517  100% 1% 1% 0%
24C# Mono #2 127.76127.8138,456484  38% 26% 24% 14%
32C++ g++ #3 171.26171.321,136414  24% 21% 19% 37%
41Erlang HiPE #2 14 min215.67632,224613  98% 98% 98% 98%
42Erlang HiPE 14 min223.85884,112534  98% 96% 97% 96%
49OCaml #6 259.44259.50864444  27% 1% 13% 62%
52Python 3 #7 18 min277.2728,372686  100% 100% 100% 100%
53PHP #3 18 min280.48107,708863  100% 100% 100% 100%
81Python 3 #2 27 min7 min47,620777  100% 98% 98% 98%
121Python 3 #5 42 min10 min28,112449  100% 100% 100% 100%
141Ruby JRuby #4 46 min12 min619,484849  95% 94% 94% 93%
176Perl 1h 02 min15 min44,184579  100% 100% 100% 100%
199Ruby #5 1h 10 min17 min51,4081019  100% 100% 100% 100%
211PHP 18 min18 min3,104443  8% 35% 29% 29%
248Ruby #2 1h 27 min21 min86,532925  100% 100% 100% 100%
263Ruby #6 1h 28 min23 min112,484909  97% 97% 97% 97%
302Ruby JRuby #2 1h 42 min26 min340,196925  98% 97% 97% 97%
402Ruby JRuby #3 35 min35 min273,780307  28% 26% 24% 25%
Fortran Intel Bad Output485
Fortran Intel #3 Bad Output754
Fortran Intel #2 Bad Output813
Ruby #3 Timed Out1h 00 min307
Ruby #4 Timed Out1h 00 min866
Ruby JRuby #6 Failed885
Ruby JRuby #5 Bad Output1019
Scala #3 Failed796
"wrong" (different) algorithm / less comparable programs
0.4C gcc #5 7.601.9216,9241026
0.5C++ g++ 11.472.8828,1081239
0.8C gcc #8 17.534.3931,700859
7.5Python 3 #6 152.0339.8050,2201380

 mandelbrot benchmark : Generate Mandelbrot set portable bitmap file

You can write your own program for this task and contribute to the benchmarks game by following these general instructions.

More specifically:

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.

Mandlebrot output N=200,converted to PNG

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.

Revised BSD license

  Home   Conclusions   License   Play