Prof Brian D Ripley
ripley at stats.ox.ac.uk
Wed Dec 2 08:54:50 CET 1998
On Tue, 1 Dec 1998, Yoon, Hoon (CICG - NY Program Trading) wrote:
> I modified benchmark used in
> http://www.informatik.uni-frankfurt.de/~stst/benchspl.txt now the attached
> code will work with R, except for last test for some reason (Sorry ran out
> of time to play with this).
You really do need to say that you did this on Wintel, and give versions of
the packages you used. As R does not have a BATCH mode that runs on NT
AFAIK, I assume you source-ed the code, which is not a good idea and can be
most misleading due to different memory usage from typing at the command
line. In short, with benchmarks the details do matter greatly.
> Immediate problem is that R does not show fraction of seconds. So, that
> kinda makes comparison some what hard. I also looked at memory and CPU usage
> on NT console. R seems to go into hybernation when not focused. The results
> are mixed. I am sure if I add something complicated or/and loops that Splus
> will slow down to crawl.
> Another interesting thing is that the random generator on Splus is a
No, it isn't! As RNGs go it is quite slow, but the R one is very slow
(despite the title of the paper `efficient' for which they never gave any
evidence). Lots of timings in a paper of mine written a decade ago:
Ripley, B. D. (1990) Thoughts on pseudorandom number generators. J. Comput.
Appl. Math. 31, 153-163.
Not that in many real tasks you will notice the difference: there are some
but I would not do those in R.
> I had many things running on the computer while trying to do this, so I am
> very confident about results.
> Has anyone done something similar? If so let me know.
These sort of tests do not test the language nor typical uses of it.
They test a few of the built-in routines, thereby mainly testing the
compilers used but also the accuracy/speed compromises used. Thus for
example for an eigendecomposition I do want to know not only the speed but
also the accuracy.
I have run fairly extensive tests of real code (from V&R, for example),
mainly to find problems. I won't give you extensive sets of numbers, but
re-iterate what I said recently on R-devel: the times are almost always
within a factor of two, and on Solaris S-PLUS 3.4 is usually a little
faster than R 0.63.0. (I am not going to comment on something as
experimental as R on Windows as although I do now have a batch mode running
reliably on Win9x, this is very recent.)
Note that, having tried it, I do NOT believe `if I add something
complicated or/and loops that Splus will slow down to crawl'. Your
prejudices are showing!
Brian D. Ripley, ripley at stats.ox.ac.uk
Professor of Applied Statistics, http://www.stats.ox.ac.uk/~ripley/
University of Oxford, Tel: +44 1865 272861 (self)
1 South Parks Road, +44 1865 272860 (secr)
Oxford OX1 3TG, UK Fax: +44 1865 272595
r-help mailing list -- Read http://www.ci.tuwien.ac.at/~hornik/R/R-FAQ.html
Send "info", "help", or "[un]subscribe"
(in the "body", not the subject !) To: r-help-request at stat.math.ethz.ch
More information about the R-help