Benchmarking newLISP

[hilti]

Here's a result for newLISP 10.4.5 on a Raspberry Pi (700 mHZ, 256 MB RAM)

Code Select Expand


pi@raspberrypi /tmp/newlisp-10.4.5/qa-specific-tests $ newlisp qa-bench

>>>>> Benchmarking all non I/O primitives ... may take a while ...
   17001.4 ms
>>>>> Performance ratio: 6.72 (1.0 on Mac OSX, 1.83 GHz Core 2 Duo, newLISP v10.2.8)


Next step is to host some newLISP sites on my Raspberry Pi.



Update:

Now http://www.rundragonfly.com">//http://www.rundragonfly.com is running on the Raspberry Pi. Performance feels quite good.

[hilti]

Here is a result at 900 mHz (overclocked with the raspi-config tool)

Code Select Expand


>>>>> Benchmarking all non I/O primitives ... may take a while ...
   13575.5 ms
>>>>> Performance ratio: 5.37 (1.0 on Mac OSX, 1.83 GHz Core 2 Duo, newLISP v10.2.8)


[Ryon]

Forbidden



You don't have permission to access / on this server.

Apache/2.2.22 (Debian) Server at http://www.rundragonfly.com">http://www.rundragonfly.com Port 80

But is this a useful purpose? :)

[hilti]

Corrected. I've just played around ;-)



I think newLISP and the Raspberry Pi are a wonderful couple, because



1. newLISP can be used for distributed computing tasks between several Raspberry Pi's

2. Uses less memory than other scripting languages (I think Python on a Pi is too much)

3. Is fast enough to serve simple dynamic websites (faster than PHP+MySQL on a Pi)



Has anyone a Raspberry Pi at home?



Cheers

Hilti

[cormullion]

Haven't got one, but I always thought it was a great idea. However I'd picked up the impression that it was really fast —people talking about HD video and things —but it's obviously not yet up to PC speed yet for general tasks. However, putting a few together might be a different story.

[kanen]

> total time: 1947.244

> Performance ratio: 0.79 (1.0 on MacOSX 10.9, 2.3GHz Intel Core i5, newLISP v10.6.0-64-bit)



This is on the Mac Pro 2013 Recycle Bin computer. :)

[cormullion]

Seems a bit slow - presumably that's due to newLISP 10.6.0 rather than OSX 10.9 or the Recycle Bin...?

[rrq]

This is my result trialling last week's 10.6.3 on a 1.5GHz A9 (ARM) dual core TV box (hardware "Amlogic Meson8B"):

>>>>> Benchmarking all non I/O primitives ... (may take a while)

>>>>> total time: 24184.55799999999

>>>>> Performance ratio: 9.29 (1.0 on MacOSX 10.9, 2.3GHz Intel Core i5, newLISP v10.6.0-64-bit)

[cormullion]

newLISP 10.6 looks to be slower than older versions — I'm only getting 0.9 seconds now on 10.6, compared with 0.4 with newLISP 10.3. I was going to investigate, but the benchmark "qa-bench" in the current distribution isn't backwards compatible with earlier versions... Which makes the top post fairly meaningless now, since they're all different version numbers. :)

[Lutz]

In my own benchmarks 10.6.x is definitely not slower, rather faster (< 1%) than previous versions. The benchmarks have changed over versions, and were recalibrated when changing to a new Mac mini in 2011 around 10.3.x. When recompiling older versions calibrated on an older 2007 Mac mini on a newer 2011 Mac mini, the older versions will give faster (lower ratios) because calibrated to an older model CPU.



Over the years newLISP only has gotten faster, never slower. The last, minor speedup in 10.4.7, when eliminating the strncat() C function for security reasons.



All benchmarks are done on Mac OS X, Linux and Windows XP. Linux is always the fastest clocking in at 0.93 to 0.94 compared to OS X



On OS X 10.10 Yosemete, newLISP has gotten slower and average of 1% comparing to OS X 10.9 Maverick.

[rrq]

cormullion, please note that my test was run on a "1.5GHz A9 (ARM) dual core Android", with performance index 9.29 relative the Mac.... and not on that type Mac.



Also, the comparison across version might be somewhat fraught, but I still think it's interesting :-)

[cormullion]

Yes, that mistake has been made more than once... :)

[rrq]

If I may add some more correction: my newlisp proclaims being:

"newLISP v.10.6.3 32-bit on Linux IPv4/6 UTF-8, options: newlisp -h"

which possibly refers to the compilation host rather than runtime host.

The run-time host itself, via "uname -a" reports being:

"Linux localhost 3.10.33 #3 SMP PREEMPT Thu Dec 25 19:03:44 CST 2014 armv7l GNU/Linux"



I guess, in short, it's "newLISP v10.6.3-32-bit".

[newdep]

few years ltr... new hardware, same software ;-)

Code Select Expand


/newlisp-10.7.5/qa-specific-tests$ ./qa-bench


254 non I/O functions performed SUCCESSFUL in 1.699 ms

Code Select Expand


>>>>> Benchmarking all non I/O primitives ... (may take a while)
>>>>> total time: 956.0399999999998
>>>>> Performance ratio: 0.41 (1.0 on macOS 10.12, MacBook (Retina, 12-inch, Early 2016), newLISP v10.7.3-64-bit)


CPU0: Intel(R) Core(TM) i7-9700F CPU @ 3.00GHz