Re: LuaJIT2 performance for number crunching

[Leo Razoumov <slonik.az@...>]

On Thu, Feb 17, 2011 at 14:54, T T <t34www@googlemail.com> wrote:
> On 17 February 2011 17:57, Leo Razoumov <slonik.az@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> The performance ratio is 40 times in favor of Lua-5.1.4 *interpreter*.
>> I guess LuaJIT-2 will be even better.
>> MATLAB sucks on loops!
>
> You do realize that you succeeded only in testing MATLAB's interpreter
> and not jit, don't you?!? MATLAB doesn't jit scripts.  Slap a
> 'function foo()' at the top and watch it run almost 80 times faster.
> For N=1e8 I get 0.91sec with MATLAB and 0.68sec with LuaJIT-2.  Pretty
> close I would say.
>
> Cheers,
>

If you had read my email carefully you would have noticed that I was
comparing Lua-5.1.4 *interpreter* to MATLAB *interpreter* only. And
yes, I am well aware that MATLAB JIT does not do scripts. I do not
have LuaJIT on that machine and I had to make sure that I am comparing
apples-to-apples.

--Leo--