Step 1 : Are the Haskell GHC programs faster? At a glance.
This chart shows 3 comparisons - Time-used, Memory-used and Code-used ~ speed and size.
Each chart bar shows, for one unidentified benchmark, how much the fastest Haskell GHC program used compared to the fastest Erlang HiPE program.
Step 2 : Are the Haskell GHC programs faster? Approximately.
This table shows 3 comparisons - Time-used, Memory-used and Code-used ~ speed and size.
Each table row shows, for one named benchmark, how much the fastest Haskell GHC program used compared to the fastest Erlang HiPE program.
| Haskell GHC used what fraction? used how many times more? | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Benchmark | Time | Memory | Code | |
| reverse-complement | 1/28 | 1/6 | 2× | |
| mandelbrot | 1/9 | 1/5 | ± | |
| spectral-norm | 1/7 | 1/8 | ± | |
| recursive | 1/6 | 1/5 | ± | |
| fasta | 1/5 | 1/3 | ± | |
| fannkuch | 1/4 | 1/5 | ± | |
| nsieve-bits | 1/4 | 1/3 | ± | |
| nsieve | 1/3 | 1/6 | ± | |
| n-body | 1/3 | 1/3 | ± | |
| pidigits | 1/3 | 1/3 | ± | |
| partial-sums | 1/2 | 1/5 | ± | |
| chameneos-redux | 1/2 | 1/3 | ± | |
| k-nucleotide | ± | 2× | 2× | |
| binary-trees | ± | 1/3 | ± | |
± read the measurements and then read the program source code.
Step 3 : Are the Haskell GHC programs faster? Measurements.
This table shows 5 measurements - CPU Time, Elapsed Time, Memory, Code and ≈ CPU Load ~ speed and size.
For each named benchmark, measurements of the fastest Haskell GHC program are shown for comparison against measurements of the fastest Erlang HiPE program.
| Program Source Code | CPU secs | Elapsed secs | Memory KB | Code B | ≈ CPU Load |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| reverse-complement | |||||
| Haskell GHC | 1.27 | 64,192 | 915 | ||
| Erlang HiPE | 35.27 | 359,852 | 452 | ||
| mandelbrot | |||||
| Haskell GHC | 0.23 | 952 | 627 | ||
| Erlang HiPE | 2.09 | 4,644 | 554 | ||
| spectral-norm | |||||
| Haskell GHC | 24.82 | 964 | 737 | ||
| Erlang HiPE | 180.09 | 7,620 | 547 | ||
| recursive | |||||
| Haskell GHC | 0.65 | 988 | 447 | ||
| Erlang HiPE | 3.62 | 4,772 | 392 | ||
| fasta | |||||
| Haskell GHC | 31.42 | 1,516 | 1406 | ||
| Erlang HiPE | 160.73 | 4,780 | 1039 | ||
| fannkuch | |||||
| Haskell GHC | 0.13 | 968 | 1005 | ||
| Erlang HiPE | 0.50 | 4,768 | 678 | ||
| nsieve-bits | |||||
| Haskell GHC | 0.68 | 1,988 | 388 | ||
| Erlang HiPE | 2.60 | 5,652 | 414 | ||
| nsieve | |||||
| Haskell GHC | 1.00 | 2,140 | 340 | ||
| Erlang HiPE | 3.39 | 13,320 | 363 | ||
| n-body | |||||
| Haskell GHC | 48.72 | 1,648 | 1687 | ||
| Erlang HiPE | 147.59 | 4,736 | 1399 | ||
| pidigits | |||||
| Haskell GHC | 0.11 | 1,492 | 377 | ||
| Erlang HiPE | 0.29 | 4,776 | 559 | ||
| partial-sums | |||||
| Haskell GHC | 4.36 | 864 | 476 | ||
| Erlang HiPE | 8.65 | 4,728 | 488 | ||
| chameneos-redux | |||||
| Haskell GHC | 11.93 | 1,528 | 789 | ||
| Erlang HiPE | 20.36 | 4,744 | 717 | ||
| k-nucleotide | |||||
| Haskell GHC | 28.56 | 164,712 | 1767 | ||
| Erlang HiPE | 41.36 | 83,260 | 889 | ||
| binary-trees | |||||
| Haskell GHC | 3.07 | 6,192 | 510 | ||
| Erlang HiPE | 3.58 | 18,096 | 441 | ||
| regex-dna | |||||
| Haskell GHC | |||||
| Erlang HiPE | 13.16 | 40,256 | 687 | ||
Step 4 : Are there other Haskell GHC programs for these benchmarks?
Remember - those are just the fastest Haskell GHC and Erlang HiPE programs measured on this OS/machine. Check if there are other implementations of these benchmark programs for Haskell GHC.
Maybe one of those other Haskell GHC programs is fastest on a different OS/machine.
Step 5 : Are there other faster programs for these benchmarks?
Remember - those are just the fastest Haskell GHC and Erlang HiPE programs measured on this OS/machine. Check if there are faster implementations of these benchmark programs for other programming languages.
Maybe one of those other programs is fastest on a different OS/machine.
Haskell GHC : lazy pure functional programming
Glasgow Haskell Compiler, Version 6.8.2, for Haskell 98, stage 2 booted by GHC version 6.8.2
Home Page: http://www.haskell.org/
Download: http://www.haskell.org/ghc/