It’s not been updated since may ’09. Somebody could have a lot of fun updating that and comparing numbers...
tim -- tim Rowledge; tim@rowledge.org; http://www.rowledge.org/tim Useful random insult:- Doesn't just know nothing; doesn't even suspect much.
DYAC - *swiki* speed page, of course!
On 02-01-2017, at 5:09 PM, tim Rowledge tim@rowledge.org wrote:
It’s not been updated since may ’09. Somebody could have a lot of fun updating that and comparing numbers...
tim
tim Rowledge; tim@rowledge.org; http://www.rowledge.org/tim Useful random insult:- Doesn't just know nothing; doesn't even suspect much.
tim -- tim Rowledge; tim@rowledge.org; http://www.rowledge.org/tim Oxymorons: Working vacation
On Mon, Jan 02, 2017 at 05:28:43PM -0800, tim Rowledge wrote:
DYAC - *swiki* speed page, of course!
Uhm ... which page is this? href?
Dave
On 02-01-2017, at 5:09 PM, tim Rowledge tim@rowledge.org wrote:
It???s not been updated since may ???09. Somebody could have a lot of fun updating that and comparing numbers...
tim
tim Rowledge; tim@rowledge.org; http://www.rowledge.org/tim Useful random insult:- Doesn't just know nothing; doesn't even suspect much.
tim
tim Rowledge; tim@rowledge.org; http://www.rowledge.org/tim Oxymorons: Working vacation
On 02-01-2017, at 5:50 PM, David T. Lewis lewis@mail.msen.com wrote:
On Mon, Jan 02, 2017 at 05:28:43PM -0800, tim Rowledge wrote:
DYAC - *swiki* speed page, of course!
Uhm ... which page is this? href?
Aargh! http://wiki.squeak.org/squeak/768 is the one.
Every now and then I randomly hit the swiki to see if I can improve a page. Too often it becomes Wumpus Hunt and I get lost in a maze of twisty passages, all alike in their interconnected outdatedness. I rather suspect that what we should do is make a new front page, start linking actually useful and current pages from there and then do a big garbage collect.
tim -- tim Rowledge; tim@rowledge.org; http://www.rowledge.org/tim A)bort, R)etry, P)ee in drive door
On 1/3/17, tim Rowledge tim@rowledge.org wrote:
On 02-01-2017, at 5:50 PM, David T. Lewis lewis@mail.msen.com wrote:
On Mon, Jan 02, 2017 at 05:28:43PM -0800, tim Rowledge wrote:
DYAC - *swiki* speed page, of course!
Uhm ... which page is this? href?
Aargh! http://wiki.squeak.org/squeak/768 is the one.
Yes, the how fast is Squeak? is interesting for historical reasons?
I however do not see which benchmark was run. Would be interesting to have some current results for comparison, e.g. RPi....
Every now and then I randomly hit the swiki to see if I can improve a page. Too often it becomes Wumpus Hunt and I get lost in a maze of twisty passages, all alike in their interconnected outdatedness. I rather suspect that what we should do is make a new front page, start linking actually useful and current pages from there and then do a big garbage collect.
tim
tim Rowledge; tim@rowledge.org; http://www.rowledge.org/tim A)bort, R)etry, P)ee in drive door
On 19-01-2017, at 1:42 AM, H. Hirzel hannes.hirzel@gmail.com wrote:
I however do not see which benchmark was run. Would be interesting to have some current results for comparison, e.g. RPi….
For this page it was always what is now included as #tinyBenchmarks - runnable from the 'About Squeak’ window. It’s not a very meaningful benchmark to be honest, but then very few are.
On the Pi3 with a CogSpur VM we get 280M bc/sec and 16M sends/sec. It’s quite sobering to look back at the ~10 year old results for then-new expensive machine and see them well beaten by a $35 ‘toy’.
tim -- tim Rowledge; tim@rowledge.org; http://www.rowledge.org/tim An algorithm must be seen to be believed.
On Fri, Jan 20, 2017 at 1:48 AM, tim Rowledge tim@rowledge.org wrote:
On 19-01-2017, at 1:42 AM, H. Hirzel hannes.hirzel@gmail.com wrote:
I however do not see which benchmark was run. Would be interesting to have some current results for comparison, e.g. RPi….
For this page it was always what is now included as #tinyBenchmarks - runnable from the 'About Squeak’ window. It’s not a very meaningful benchmark to be honest, but then very few are.
On the Pi3 with a CogSpur VM we get 280M bc/sec and 16M sends/sec. It’s quite sobering to look back at the ~10 year old results for then-new expensive machine and see them well beaten by a $35 ‘toy’.
And imagine where we will be in another 10 years. cheers -ben
On 19-01-2017, at 3:21 PM, Ben Coman btc@openinworld.com wrote:
And imagine where we will be in another 10 years.
Well it should be interesting. I suspect we’re near the end of single core performance increases of any dramatic degree. So we should be thinking of ways to make good use of many-core systems for Squeak.
Note that on a good modern x86 desktop you can anticipate something like 3B bytecodes/sec and 200M sends/sec - and at that level it probably makes the benchmark even less meaningful.
tim -- tim Rowledge; tim@rowledge.org; http://www.rowledge.org/tim No, I don't explode cats. It's way too difficult to coax them into the microwave
squeak-dev@lists.squeakfoundation.org