Exupery 0.10 is now released. There are prebuilt VM's available for both Windows and Linux. This release now provides a measurable speed improvement for the compilerBenchmark macro benchmark due to work on dynamic primitive inlining.
Instructions for installation and a link to a pre-built image is here:
http://minnow.cc.gatech.edu/squeak/3945
Benchmarks on my Athlon 64 3500+ ========================================================= arithmaticLoopBenchmark 1398 compiled 92 ratio: 15.196 bytecodeBenchmark 2134 compiled 469 ratio: 4.550 sendBenchmark 1580 compiled 697 ratio: 2.267 doLoopsBenchmark 1090 compiled 840 ratio: 1.298 largeExplorers 334 compiled 358 ratio: 0.933 compilerBenchmark 733 compiled 705 ratio: 1.040 Cumulative Time 4167 compiled 1448 ratio 2.878
1,067,222,511 bytecodes/sec; 16,716,421 sends/sec
Benchmarks on Andy's Mobile Pentium 3 ========================================================= arithmaticLoopBenchmark 2487 compiled 285 ratio: 8.726 bytecodeBenchmark 4271 compiled 1255 ratio: 3.403 sendBenchmark 3482 compiled 1772 ratio: 1.965 doLoopsBenchmark 2078 compiled 1663 ratio: 1.250 largeExplorers 2224 compiled 1683 ratio: 1.321 compilerBenchmark 2093 compiled 1712 ratio: 1.223 Cumulative Time 12903 compiled 4971 ratio 2.596
Benchmarks from my Pentium-M laptop ========================================================= arithmaticLoopBenchmark 1003 compiled 191 ratio: 5.251 bytecodeBenchmark 1773 compiled 683 ratio: 2.596 sendBenchmark 1446 compiled 922 ratio: 1.568 doLoopsBenchmark 991 compiled 918 ratio: 1.080 largeExplorers 418 compiled 441 ratio: 0.948 compilerBenchmark 718 compiled 683 ratio: 1.051 Cumulative Time 3773 compiled 2015 ratio 1.872
It's interesting that on Andy's machine Exupery is providing a nice performance improvement for largeExplorers while on my machine there is a 7% performance loss. The loss is due to the interpreter inlining Point>>@ into the main interpreter loop while Exupery executes it as a normal primitive. Andy's benchmarks are promising enough for a 1.0, pity relative performance isn't so high on the other two machines.
There is a mailing list for those interested in the project here:
http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/exupery
Many thanks to Andy Tween for doing the Windows port and building the official Windows VM. Thanks also to Patrick Mauritz for doing a Solaris x86 port which was the first OS port.
Bryce
First of all - let me thank you to the work you have done, Bruce!
I have tested Exupery with provided image on 3 different machines. And here are the numbers:
1) Intel Pentium 4 Mobile 1.8 GHz (Win VM) - look at doLoopsBenchmark results!
arithmaticLoopBenchmark 2097 compiled 158 ratio: 13.272 bytecodeBenchmark 2958 compiled 619 ratio: 4.778 sendBenchmark 2718 compiled 1874 ratio: 1.449 doLoopsBenchmark 1647 compiled 2965 ratio: 0.555 largeExplorers 1156 compiled 1166 ratio: 0.991 compilerBenchmark 1082 compiled 1085 ratio: 0.997 Cumulative Time 8093.659 compiled 3693.635 ratio 2.190
2) AMD Sempron 3100+ 1.8GHz (Win VM) - this one was born to run Exupery :)
arithmaticLoopBenchmark 1708 compiled 113 ratio: 15.115 bytecodeBenchmark 2505 compiled 545 ratio: 4.596 sendBenchmark 1871 compiled 841 ratio: 2.225 doLoopsBenchmark 1203 compiled 809 ratio: 1.487 largeExplorers 704 compiled 458 ratio: 1.536 compilerBenchmark 701 compiled 774 ratio: 0.906 Cumulative Time 5437.323 compiled 1715.399 ratio 3.169
3) Intel Pentium Celeron 2000+
arithmaticLoopBenchmark 1862 compiled 125 ratio: 14.896 bytecodeBenchmark 3115 compiled 732 ratio: 4.254 sendBenchmark 2130 compiled 973 ratio: 2.189 doLoopsBenchmark 1453 compiled 940 ratio: 1.546 largeExplorers 872 compiled 832 ratio: 1.048 compilerBenchmark 1078 compiled 1043 ratio: 1.034 Cumulative Time 7005.573 compiled 2356.208 ratio 2.972
Note: .tz extension means tar gzip format? If yes then having .tgz or .tar.gz extension allows easier extraction in more tools (Total Commander doesn't understand .tz, in WinZip and IZArc I had to rename ungzipped file, etc.)
Bye!
Jakub
On 11/15/06, bryce@kampjes.demon.co.uk bryce@kampjes.demon.co.uk wrote:
Exupery 0.10 is now released. There are prebuilt VM's available for both Windows and Linux. This release now provides a measurable speed improvement for the compilerBenchmark macro benchmark due to work on dynamic primitive inlining.
Instructions for installation and a link to a pre-built image is here:
http://minnow.cc.gatech.edu/squeak/3945
Benchmarks on my Athlon 64 3500+ ========================================================= arithmaticLoopBenchmark 1398 compiled 92 ratio: 15.196 bytecodeBenchmark 2134 compiled 469 ratio: 4.550 sendBenchmark 1580 compiled 697 ratio: 2.267 doLoopsBenchmark 1090 compiled 840 ratio: 1.298 largeExplorers 334 compiled 358 ratio: 0.933 compilerBenchmark 733 compiled 705 ratio: 1.040 Cumulative Time 4167 compiled 1448 ratio 2.878 1,067,222,511 bytecodes/sec; 16,716,421 sends/sec Benchmarks on Andy's Mobile Pentium 3 ========================================================= arithmaticLoopBenchmark 2487 compiled 285 ratio: 8.726 bytecodeBenchmark 4271 compiled 1255 ratio: 3.403 sendBenchmark 3482 compiled 1772 ratio: 1.965 doLoopsBenchmark 2078 compiled 1663 ratio: 1.250 largeExplorers 2224 compiled 1683 ratio: 1.321 compilerBenchmark 2093 compiled 1712 ratio: 1.223 Cumulative Time 12903 compiled 4971 ratio 2.596 Benchmarks from my Pentium-M laptop ========================================================= arithmaticLoopBenchmark 1003 compiled 191 ratio: 5.251 bytecodeBenchmark 1773 compiled 683 ratio: 2.596 sendBenchmark 1446 compiled 922 ratio: 1.568 doLoopsBenchmark 991 compiled 918 ratio: 1.080 largeExplorers 418 compiled 441 ratio: 0.948 compilerBenchmark 718 compiled 683 ratio: 1.051 Cumulative Time 3773 compiled 2015 ratio 1.872It's interesting that on Andy's machine Exupery is providing a nice performance improvement for largeExplorers while on my machine there is a 7% performance loss. The loss is due to the interpreter inlining Point>>@ into the main interpreter loop while Exupery executes it as a normal primitive. Andy's benchmarks are promising enough for a 1.0, pity relative performance isn't so high on the other two machines.
There is a mailing list for those interested in the project here:
http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/exupery
Many thanks to Andy Tween for doing the Windows port and building the official Windows VM. Thanks also to Patrick Mauritz for doing a Solaris x86 port which was the first OS port.
Bryce _______________________________________________ Exupery mailing list Exupery@lists.squeakfoundation.org http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/exupery
Errata:
3) AMD Athlon XP 2000+
(erm, screwed it a lot ... not using it very frequently O:)
On 11/16/06, Jakub Kozisek jakub.kozisek@gmail.com wrote:
First of all - let me thank you to the work you have done, Bruce!
I have tested Exupery with provided image on 3 different machines. And here are the numbers:
- Intel Pentium 4 Mobile 1.8 GHz (Win VM) - look at doLoopsBenchmark results!
arithmaticLoopBenchmark 2097 compiled 158 ratio: 13.272 bytecodeBenchmark 2958 compiled 619 ratio: 4.778 sendBenchmark 2718 compiled 1874 ratio: 1.449 doLoopsBenchmark 1647 compiled 2965 ratio: 0.555 largeExplorers 1156 compiled 1166 ratio: 0.991 compilerBenchmark 1082 compiled 1085 ratio: 0.997 Cumulative Time 8093.659 compiled 3693.635 ratio 2.190
- AMD Sempron 3100+ 1.8GHz (Win VM) - this one was born to run Exupery :)
arithmaticLoopBenchmark 1708 compiled 113 ratio: 15.115 bytecodeBenchmark 2505 compiled 545 ratio: 4.596 sendBenchmark 1871 compiled 841 ratio: 2.225 doLoopsBenchmark 1203 compiled 809 ratio: 1.487 largeExplorers 704 compiled 458 ratio: 1.536 compilerBenchmark 701 compiled 774 ratio: 0.906 Cumulative Time 5437.323 compiled 1715.399 ratio 3.169
- Intel Pentium Celeron 2000+
arithmaticLoopBenchmark 1862 compiled 125 ratio: 14.896 bytecodeBenchmark 3115 compiled 732 ratio: 4.254 sendBenchmark 2130 compiled 973 ratio: 2.189 doLoopsBenchmark 1453 compiled 940 ratio: 1.546 largeExplorers 872 compiled 832 ratio: 1.048 compilerBenchmark 1078 compiled 1043 ratio: 1.034 Cumulative Time 7005.573 compiled 2356.208 ratio 2.972
Note: .tz extension means tar gzip format? If yes then having .tgz or .tar.gz extension allows easier extraction in more tools (Total Commander doesn't understand .tz, in WinZip and IZArc I had to rename ungzipped file, etc.)
Bye!
Jakub
On 11/15/06, bryce@kampjes.demon.co.uk bryce@kampjes.demon.co.uk wrote:
Exupery 0.10 is now released. There are prebuilt VM's available for both Windows and Linux. This release now provides a measurable speed improvement for the compilerBenchmark macro benchmark due to work on dynamic primitive inlining.
Instructions for installation and a link to a pre-built image is here:
http://minnow.cc.gatech.edu/squeak/3945
Benchmarks on my Athlon 64 3500+ ========================================================= arithmaticLoopBenchmark 1398 compiled 92 ratio: 15.196 bytecodeBenchmark 2134 compiled 469 ratio: 4.550 sendBenchmark 1580 compiled 697 ratio: 2.267 doLoopsBenchmark 1090 compiled 840 ratio: 1.298 largeExplorers 334 compiled 358 ratio: 0.933 compilerBenchmark 733 compiled 705 ratio: 1.040 Cumulative Time 4167 compiled 1448 ratio 2.878 1,067,222,511 bytecodes/sec; 16,716,421 sends/sec Benchmarks on Andy's Mobile Pentium 3 ========================================================= arithmaticLoopBenchmark 2487 compiled 285 ratio: 8.726 bytecodeBenchmark 4271 compiled 1255 ratio: 3.403 sendBenchmark 3482 compiled 1772 ratio: 1.965 doLoopsBenchmark 2078 compiled 1663 ratio: 1.250 largeExplorers 2224 compiled 1683 ratio: 1.321 compilerBenchmark 2093 compiled 1712 ratio: 1.223 Cumulative Time 12903 compiled 4971 ratio 2.596 Benchmarks from my Pentium-M laptop ========================================================= arithmaticLoopBenchmark 1003 compiled 191 ratio: 5.251 bytecodeBenchmark 1773 compiled 683 ratio: 2.596 sendBenchmark 1446 compiled 922 ratio: 1.568 doLoopsBenchmark 991 compiled 918 ratio: 1.080 largeExplorers 418 compiled 441 ratio: 0.948 compilerBenchmark 718 compiled 683 ratio: 1.051 Cumulative Time 3773 compiled 2015 ratio 1.872It's interesting that on Andy's machine Exupery is providing a nice performance improvement for largeExplorers while on my machine there is a 7% performance loss. The loss is due to the interpreter inlining Point>>@ into the main interpreter loop while Exupery executes it as a normal primitive. Andy's benchmarks are promising enough for a 1.0, pity relative performance isn't so high on the other two machines.
There is a mailing list for those interested in the project here:
http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/exupery
Many thanks to Andy Tween for doing the Windows port and building the official Windows VM. Thanks also to Patrick Mauritz for doing a Solaris x86 port which was the first OS port.
Bryce _______________________________________________ Exupery mailing list Exupery@lists.squeakfoundation.org http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/exupery
exupery@lists.squeakfoundation.org
-
bryce＠kampjes.demon.co.uk -
Jakub Kozisek