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 | 1/10 | 2× | ± | |
| mandelbrot | 1/8 | 1/19 | ± | |
| pidigits | 1/7 | 1/2 | 1/2 | |
| n-body | 1/5 | 1/3 | ± | |
| fasta | 1/4 | 1/4 | ± | |
| fannkuch | 1/4 | 1/2 | ± | |
| k-nucleotide | 1/4 | ± | 3× | |
| spectral-norm | 1/3 | 1/6 | ± | |
| binary-trees | 2× | ± | ± | |
± 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 | 3.79 | 3.79 | 618,056 | 913 | 62% 1% 1% 39% |
| Erlang HiPE | 52.82 | 36.80 | 381,300 | 1167 | 58% 41% 31% 13% |
| mandelbrot | |||||
| Haskell GHC | 54.48 | 13.94 | 35,292 | 772 | 98% 98% 99% 96% |
| Erlang HiPE | 400.35 | 106.96 | 655,656 | 534 | 96% 94% 93% 91% |
| pidigits | |||||
| Haskell GHC | 2.98 | 2.98 | 5,232 | 332 | 100% 0% 0% 0% |
| Erlang HiPE | 20.77 | 20.78 | 11,392 | 559 | 52% 0% 0% 48% |
| n-body | |||||
| Haskell GHC | 37.08 | 37.07 | 1,784 | 1687 | 0% 36% 64% 0% |
| Erlang HiPE | 182.34 | 182.39 | 6,012 | 1399 | 94% 0% 0% 6% |
| fasta | |||||
| Haskell GHC | 10.80 | 10.80 | 1,720 | 1406 | 100% 0% 0% 0% |
| Erlang HiPE | 48.58 | 48.59 | 6,116 | 1164 | 98% 0% 2% 0% |
| fannkuch | |||||
| Haskell GHC | 156.67 | 40.77 | 4,068 | 1204 | 95% 96% 94% 96% |
| Erlang HiPE | 660.86 | 169.20 | 6,280 | 864 | 100% 97% 98% 97% |
| k-nucleotide | |||||
| Haskell GHC | 106.05 | 50.84 | 371,688 | 2749 | 60% 52% 14% 81% |
| Erlang HiPE | 525.92 | 187.56 | 307,792 | 932 | 73% 81% 76% 52% |
| spectral-norm | |||||
| Haskell GHC | 15.83 | 4.13 | 1,856 | 869 | 98% 93% 98% 95% |
| Erlang HiPE | 45.84 | 11.79 | 10,368 | 747 | 97% 97% 97% 97% |
| binary-trees | |||||
| Haskell GHC | 50.26 | 32.00 | 217,364 | 544 | 45% 46% 33% 31% |
| Erlang HiPE | 54.46 | 18.66 | 166,140 | 499 | 80% 67% 73% 70% |
| chameneos-redux | |||||
| Haskell GHC | 0.12 | 0.07 | ? | 832 | 0% 75% 14% 75% |
| regex-dna | |||||
| Haskell GHC | |||||
| Erlang HiPE | 2.22 | 1.12 | 10,860 | 855 | 49% 42% 25% 85% |
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 6.10.4, for Haskell 98, stage 2 booted by GHC version 6.10.4
Home Page: http://www.haskell.org/
Download: http://www.haskell.org/ghc/