x64 Ubuntu : Intel® Q6600® quad-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 gcc Clojure C# Mono C++ g++ Dart Erlang Erlang HiPE F# Mono Fortran Intel Go Haskell GHC Java 7 Lisp SBCL OCaml Pascal Free Pascal Perl PHP Python 3 Racket Ruby 2.0 Ruby JRuby Scala x86 one core x64 quad-core x86 quad-core x64 one core

 regex-dna benchmark ≈50MB N=5,000,000

Each chart bar shows how many times more Memory, one ↓ regex-dna 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	C gcc #4	18.79	6.17	86,236	1525	74% 68% 100% 64%
1.1	Ada 2005 GNAT #5	17.85	5.67	97,988	3492	77% 69% 93% 77%
1.2	Ada 2005 GNAT #6	18.70	6.16	100,232	3740	63% 69% 72% 100%
1.3	C++ g++ #4	17.05	5.42	113,592	1759	70% 92% 97% 58%
1.4	C gcc #2	23.68	23.70	124,760	1099	78% 0% 0% 22%
1.6	Perl #2	30.75	11.21	141,108	527	49% 70% 76% 80%
1.9	ATS	24.66	24.68	167,308	2482	0% 0% 0% 100%
2.0	C++ g++ #2	5.83	4.10	173,632	695	0% 60% 82% 0%
2.1	C++ g++ #3	27.64	16.45	179,596	844	68% 2% 64% 35%
2.2	Perl #4	62.26	62.29	189,296	440	0% 0% 0% 100%
2.4	C++ g++	5.37	5.38	203,344	648	1% 0% 0% 100%
2.4	Python 3 #5	21.77	21.78	208,944	424	0% 0% 0% 100%
2.5	PHP #2	50.45	50.48	215,200	449	0% 0% 0% 100%
2.6	ATS #2	24.95	6.67	221,112	3474	94% 96% 92% 94%
2.6	PHP #3	35.80	35.82	222,432	459	0% 0% 0% 100%
2.9	Haskell GHC #2	36.53	9.58	248,772	1518	95% 97% 95% 96%
3.0	Python 3	26.34	12.88	255,724	478	41% 33% 99% 32%
3.1	OCaml #4	1.45	9.20	264,704	1050	84% 85% 86% 99%
3.4	Ruby 2.0 #3	30.67	13.88	290,688	501	41% 89% 41% 50%
3.4	C gcc	5.76	2.50	292,128	2579	69% 68% 49% 46%
3.5	Erlang #6	179.88	57.58	301,544	1058	99% 76% 65% 72%
3.9	Erlang HiPE #6	182.81	47.68	337,096	1058	92% 96% 99% 97%
4.5	Ruby 2.0	43.48	43.51	389,532	308	0% 96% 4% 0%
4.6	Ruby 2.0 #2	30.23	30.25	393,916	417	8% 32% 33% 27%
5.1	Go #7	65.17	64.50	436,904	652	100% 1% 0% 0%
5.4	Go #8	65.08	19.87	469,876	785	77% 75% 76% 99%
5.9	OCaml	19.34	10.96	511,676	1502	26% 27% 87% 38%
5.9	OCaml #3	19.34	10.97	511,684	1014	26% 88% 26% 38%
6.4	Clojure #3	49.73	25.08	554,628	710	44% 32% 40% 82%
6.4	OCaml #2	18.85	18.88	555,452	615	0% 0% 100% 0%
6.5	Java 7  #7	22.43	21.92	560,328	1284	1% 0% 100% 2%
6.6	C# Mono #6	69.88	29.79	571,500	638	76% 47% 63% 50%
6.7	Go	157.24	60.04	574,724	733	71% 63% 65% 63%
7.0	C# Mono #2	61.62	61.67	604,084	594	3% 2% 11% 85%
7.9	Racket	41.08	41.09	677,072	527	90% 10% 0% 0%
8.2	Java 7  #5	24.82	8.55	709,672	929	65% 82% 65% 79%
8.5	Java 7  #2	41.59	13.25	734,208	1534	81% 81% 79% 74%
9.3	Scala	39.04	34.86	805,252	611	4% 5% 4% 99%
9.5	Lisp SBCL #3	45.42	21.81	818,628	1948	41% 39% 89% 41%
9.5	Java 7  #4	24.93	23.58	820,540	921	2% 2% 2% 99%
11	Scala #2	34.01	15.48	980,808	668	39% 77% 61% 43%
16	F# Mono	67.22	21.57	1,394,136	639	92% 75% 69% 77%
23	Ruby JRuby	83.72	77.40	1,945,376	308	3% 3% 98% 3%
24	Ruby JRuby #2	46.97	18.76	2,039,392	417	71% 70% 59% 51%
24	Ruby JRuby #3	46.88	18.77	2,040,348	501	68% 82% 46% 54%
33	C# Mono	62.60	62.76	2,816,940	624	0% 0% 100% 0%
34	F# Mono #2	63.06	63.21	2,969,364	413	0% 0% 100% 0%
37	F# Mono #3	68.76	23.91	3,166,244	870	64% 75% 82% 67%
	Dart	Timed Out	5 min		632
	Erlang	Timed Out	10 min		622
	Erlang HiPE	Timed Out	10 min		622
	Java 7  #6	Failed			1410
	Lisp SBCL	Bad Output			591
	Racket #2	Bad Output			536
	Ruby 2.0 #4	Bad Output			523
	Ruby JRuby #4	Bad Output			523
	Scala #4	Failed			723
	Scala #3	Failed			633
"wrong" (different) algorithm / less comparable programs
1.3	Pascal Free Pascal	19.55	19.56	110,564	1199
1.6	Perl #7	4.33	2.92	140,044	567
2.2	Perl #6	4.45	4.46	190,244	477
3.0	Java 7  #3	7.69	2.84	261,788	2084
4.5	Erlang HiPE #7	7.80	3.05	387,616	1198
4.5	Erlang #7	8.61	3.59	387,632	1198
missing benchmark programs
	Fortran Intel	No program
	Pascal Free Pascal	No program

 regex-dna benchmark : Match DNA 8-mers and substitute nucleotides for IUB codes

diff program output for this 100KB input file (generated with the fasta program N = 10000) with this 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.

We use FASTA files generated by the fasta benchmark as input for this benchmark. Note: the file may include both lowercase and uppercase codes.

Each program should

• read all of a redirected FASTA format file from stdin, and record the sequence length
• use the same simple regex pattern match-replace to remove FASTA sequence descriptions and all linefeed characters, and record the sequence length
• use the same simple regex patterns, representing DNA 8-mers and their reverse complement (with a wildcard in one position), and (one pattern at a time) count matches in the redirected file
• write the regex pattern and count
• use the same simple regex patterns to make IUB code alternatives explicit, and (one pattern at a time) match-replace the pattern in the redirect file, and record the sequence length
• write the 3 recorded sequence lengths

  Home   Conclusions   License   Play