/mobile Handheld Friendly website

÷

 1 : Are the Haskell GHC programs faster? At a glance.

Each chart bar shows, for one unidentified benchmark, how much the fastest Haskell GHC program used compared to the fastest OCaml 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 Haskell GHC programs faster? Approximately.

Each table row shows, for one named benchmark, how much the fastest Haskell GHC program used compared to the fastest OCaml program.

 Haskell GHC used what fraction? used how many times more? 
Benchmark Time Memory Code
 fasta1/31/75±
 binary-trees±±
 mandelbrot±±
 k-nucleotide±±±
 spectral-norm±1/2±
 n-body±
 pidigits †±±1/2
 regex-dna±±±
 reverse-complement±
 fannkuch-redux †1/51/2
 Haskell GHC used what fraction? used how many times more? 
Time-used  |-  |---  25% median  75%  ---|  -|
(Elapsed secs)1/31/3±±±±

† possible mismatch - one-core program compared to multi-core program.

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

 3 : Are the Haskell GHC 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 Haskell GHC program are shown for comparison against measurements of the fastest OCaml program.

Program Source Code CPU secs Elapsed secs Memory KB Code B ≈ CPU Load
 fasta 
Haskell GHC4.684.032,632979  5% 86% 19% 5%
OCaml10.5010.52198,0601161  0% 0% 0% 100%
 binary-trees 
Haskell GHC65.0020.04787,716612  90% 85% 75% 75%
OCaml67.3327.17201,692784  40% 84% 55% 71%
 mandelbrot 
Haskell GHC43.6610.9536,536782  100% 100% 100% 100%
OCaml55.5713.986,316710  99% 100% 100% 100%
 k-nucleotide 
Haskell GHC68.5018.58374,4881693  91% 93% 93% 93%
OCaml56.8221.99258,4801789  55% 39% 100% 65%
 spectral-norm 
Haskell GHC15.704.041,584984  97% 98% 95% 100%
OCaml16.584.393,504938  99% 98% 99% 99%
 n-body 
Haskell GHC24.8623.442,3761874  64% 6% 17% 20%
OCaml23.8223.837161239  0% 0% 0% 100%
 pidigits 
Haskell GHC4.182.776,076341  18% 100% 17% 14% †
OCaml2.802.819,036560  0% 3% 1% 100% †
 regex-dna 
Haskell GHC36.539.58248,7721518  95% 97% 95% 96%
OCaml1.459.20264,7041050  84% 85% 86% 99%
 reverse-complement 
Haskell GHC1.781.49126,196999  80% 28% 6% 9%
OCaml0.000.8131,0521314  49% 42% 48% 75%
 fannkuch-redux 
Haskell GHC75.4868.672,336658  15% 42% 43% 10% †
OCaml0.0016.3611,5521004  100% 100% 100% 100% †
 fasta-redux
   No programs

† possible mismatch - one-core program compared to multi-core program.

 4 : Are there other Haskell GHC programs for these benchmarks?

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

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

 5 : Are there other faster programs for these benchmarks?

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

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

 Haskell GHC : lazy pure functional programming 

llvm version 3.1-2ubuntu1

The Glorious Glasgow Haskell Compilation System, version 7.6.2

Home Page: http://www.haskell.org/

Download: http://www.haskell.org/ghc/

Revised BSD license

  Home   Conclusions   License   Play