Compare the performance of ATS programs against some other language implementation.
For more information about the ATS implementation we measured see ↓ about ATS.
ATS comparison summary
| 1/2 1/3 1/4 … ATS is better | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Programs | Time | Memory Use | Source Size | Reduced N |
| chameneos-redux | ||||
| pidigits | ||||
| k-nucleotide | ||||
| binary-trees | 1/2 | ± | 2 | |
| fasta | ± | 1/2 | 2 | |
| mandelbrot | ± | ± | 3 | |
| fannkuch | ± | 1/2 | 2 | |
| n-body | ± | 1/2 | ± | |
| reverse-complement | ± | 1/2 | 2 | |
| regex-dna | ± | ± | 2 | |
| spectral-norm | 2 | ± | 2 | |
± look at the measurements
ATS comparison measurements
| Program & Logs | CPU secs | Memory KB | Size B | Elapsed secs | ~ CPU Load |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| binary-trees | |||||
| ATS | 16.84 | 132,040 | 1060 | 16.84 | 0% 0% 100% 0% |
| C++ GNU g++ #2 | 40.80 | 99,396 | 553 | 40.79 | 0% 0% 0% 100% |
| fasta | |||||
| ATS | 5.38 | 432 | 2257 | 5.38 | 100% 0% 0% 0% |
| C++ GNU g++ #4 | 6.07 | 744 | 1266 | 6.07 | 0% 100% 0% 0% |
| mandelbrot | |||||
| ATS #3 | 22.10 | 28,976 | 2780 | 5.53 | 100% 100% 100% 100% |
| C++ GNU g++ #5 | 24.70 | 28,800 | 858 | 6.18 | 100% 100% 100% 100% |
| fannkuch | |||||
| ATS | 66.63 | 508 | 1191 | 66.63 | 100% 0% 0% 0% |
| C++ GNU g++ #2 | 71.42 | 1,092 | 554 | 71.41 | 100% 0% 0% 0% |
| n-body | |||||
| ATS #2 | 24.89 | 456 | 2088 | 24.89 | 0% 100% 0% 0% |
| C++ GNU g++ #4 | 23.84 | 788 | 1428 | 23.84 | 1% 0% 100% 0% |
| reverse-complement | |||||
| ATS | 1.19 | 122,628 | 2077 | 1.19 | 0% 0% 2% 100% |
| C++ GNU g++ #2 | 1.81 | 245,092 | 1098 | 1.13 | 15% 31% 21% 88% |
| regex-dna | |||||
| ATS | 33.00 | 155,776 | 2551 | 33.00 | 100% 0% 0% 0% |
| C++ GNU g++ #3 | 28.80 | 116,612 | 1599 | 28.80 | 31% 0% 0% 70% |
| spectral-norm | |||||
| ATS #2 | 20.57 | 1,268 | 2339 | 5.54 | 93% 93% 92% 92% |
| C++ GNU g++ #7 | 12.01 | 1,032 | 1114 | 3.01 | 100% 100% 100% 100% |
about ATS
0.1.6
Home Page: ATS -- unleashing the potential of types!
