[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: CLX Speed: Pretty poor
Your message:
We ran some tests to see how fast CLX is, and it isn't. Compared to
calling the X routines from C, CLX is **approximately 15 times slower**
(1500% slower). This is running the standard CLX under CMU CommonLisp
on IBM RTs with X11R3. My impression is the Lucid CLX is not faster (and
may be even slower).
...
* Is CLX on some other machines faster? (I challenge you to execute this
test yourself and see!)
...
The Moves/Second is the number of rectangles that can be drawn (or
drawn and erased) per second (so bigger numbers are better).
The Bytes/Move is the number of cons
cells allocated (why are there any at all?). Only two of the tests have
been run in C so far.
Moves/Second Lisp/C Comparison
Moves/Second Bytes/Move in C (moves/sec)
------------ ---------- -------------- -----------
Test1 129.5 32 1860.5 x14.37
Test2 930.0 32
Test3 114.9 40
Test4 104.7 64
Test5 89.1 80 1465.2 x16.44
Test6 72.2 144
...
Here follows the Lisp code which produced these results:
...
Does the code you sent correspond to test 1?
I changed the "display-finish-output" to "display-force-output" and ran it
on a sun4/260 using Franz Allegro CL 3.1beta, and May Day CLX. Display
was "unix:0".
I got about 3500 "moves"/cpu second, and no consing.
-- John Irwin, jdi@franz.com