[Numpy-discussion] Execution time difference between 2.7 and 3.2 using numpy
Frédéric Bastien
nouiz@nouiz....
Wed Mar 20 09:30:48 CDT 2013
Hi,
win32 do not mean it is a 32 bits windows. sys.platform always return
win32 on 32bits and 64 bits windows even for python 64 bits.
But that is a good question, is your python 32 or 64 bits?
Fred
On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 10:14 AM, Daπid <davidmenhur@gmail.com> wrote:
> Without much detailed knowledge of the topic, I would expect both
> versions to give very similar timing, as it is essentially a call to
> ATLAS function, not much is done in Python.
>
> Given this, maybe the difference is in ATLAS itself. How have you
> installed it? When you compile ATLAS, it will do some machine-specific
> optimisation, but if you have installed a binary chances are that your
> version is optimised for a machine quite different from yours. So, two
> different installations could have been compiled in different machines
> and so one is more suited for your machine. If you want to be sure, I
> would try to compile ATLAS (this may be difficult) or check the same
> on a very different machine (like an AMD processor, different
> architecture...).
>
>
>
> Just for reference, on Linux Python 2.7 64 bits can deal with these
> matrices easily.
>
> %timeit mat=np.random.random((6143,6143)); matinv= np.linalg.inv(mat);
> res = np.dot(mat, matinv); diff= res-np.eye(6143); print
> np.sum(np.abs(diff))
> 2.41799631031e-05
> 1.13955868701e-05
> 3.64338191541e-05
> 1.13484781021e-05
> 1 loops, best of 3: 156 s per loop
>
> Intel i5, 4 GB of RAM and SSD. ATLAS installed from Fedora repository
> (I don't run heavy stuff on this computer).
>
> On 20 March 2013 14:46, Colin J. Williams <cjw@ncf.ca> wrote:
>> I have a small program which builds random matrices for increasing matrix
>> orders, inverts the matrix and checks the precision of the product. At some
>> point, one would expect operations to fail, when the memory capacity is
>> exceeded. In both Python 2.7 and 3.2 matrices of order 3,071 area handled,
>> but not 6,143.
>>
>> Using wall-clock times, with win32, Python 3.2 is slower than Python 2.7.
>> The profiler indicates a problem in the solver.
>>
>> Done on a Pentium, with 2.7 GHz processor, 2 GB of RAM and 221 GB of free
>> disk space. Both Python 3.2.3 and Python 2.7.3 use numpy 1.6.2.
>>
>> The results are show below.
>>
>> Colin W.
>>
>> aaaa_ssss
>> 2.7.3 (default, Apr 10 2012, 23:31:26) [MSC v.1500 32 bit (Intel)]
>> order= 2 measure ofimprecision= 0.097 Time elapsed (seconds)=
>> 0.004143
>> order= 5 measure ofimprecision= 2.207 Time elapsed (seconds)=
>> 0.001514
>> order= 11 measure ofimprecision= 2.372 Time elapsed (seconds)=
>> 0.001455
>> order= 23 measure ofimprecision= 3.318 Time elapsed (seconds)=
>> 0.001608
>> order= 47 measure ofimprecision= 4.257 Time elapsed (seconds)=
>> 0.002339
>> order= 95 measure ofimprecision= 4.986 Time elapsed (seconds)=
>> 0.005747
>> order= 191 measure ofimprecision= 5.788 Time elapsed (seconds)=
>> 0.029974
>> order= 383 measure ofimprecision= 6.765 Time elapsed (seconds)=
>> 0.145339
>> order= 767 measure ofimprecision= 7.909 Time elapsed (seconds)=
>> 0.841142
>> order= 1535 measure ofimprecision= 8.532 Time elapsed (seconds)=
>> 5.793630
>> order= 3071 measure ofimprecision= 9.774 Time elapsed (seconds)=
>> 39.559540
>> order= 6143 Process terminated by a MemoryError
>>
>> Above: 2.7.3 Below: Python 3.2.3
>>
>> bbb_bbb
>> 3.2.3 (default, Apr 11 2012, 07:15:24) [MSC v.1500 32 bit (Intel)]
>> order= 2 measure ofimprecision= 0.000 Time elapsed (seconds)=
>> 0.113930
>> order= 5 measure ofimprecision= 1.807 Time elapsed (seconds)=
>> 0.001373
>> order= 11 measure ofimprecision= 2.395 Time elapsed (seconds)=
>> 0.001468
>> order= 23 measure ofimprecision= 3.073 Time elapsed (seconds)=
>> 0.001609
>> order= 47 measure ofimprecision= 5.642 Time elapsed (seconds)=
>> 0.002687
>> order= 95 measure ofimprecision= 5.745 Time elapsed (seconds)=
>> 0.013510
>> order= 191 measure ofimprecision= 5.866 Time elapsed (seconds)=
>> 0.061560
>> order= 383 measure ofimprecision= 7.129 Time elapsed (seconds)=
>> 0.418490
>> order= 767 measure ofimprecision= 8.240 Time elapsed (seconds)=
>> 3.815713
>> order= 1535 measure ofimprecision= 8.735 Time elapsed (seconds)=
>> 27.877270
>> order= 3071 measure ofimprecision= 9.996 Time elapsed
>> (seconds)=212.545610
>> order= 6143 Process terminated by a MemoryError
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> NumPy-Discussion mailing list
>> NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org
>> http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
>>
> _______________________________________________
> NumPy-Discussion mailing list
> NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org
> http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
More information about the NumPy-Discussion
mailing list