From: Jeffrey A. Sullivan
Subject: Allegro CL Benchmarks
Date: 
Message-ID: <7959@cisunx.UUCP>
Here is a benchmark examination of Coral Allegro CL vs Lucid CL that is
part of a review article I did for our ITS Newsletter.  Sorry the formatting
is not great, but it's the best I could do on short notice.

I also tried to run the gabriel suite on Lyric CL from Xerox, but the first
one took so long to run (never stopped in 5 minutes) that I gave it up.  If
someone has the gabriel suite for Lyric CL, I'd like to see it.

Also, there is a benchmark listing in a past issue of BYTE.  I can't recall
which.

Benchmarks 

In order to determine the relative efficiency of Allegro CL, the Gabriel suite
of benchmarks was run in Allegro CL and Lucid CL on a Vax 8860.  The results
appear below. 


	Allegro	Optimized Allegro	Vax (C)	Vax (I)
Boyer	36.000	23.050	7.81/1.01	418.12/26.66
Browse	65.233 	52.800	8.87/0.58	587.73/37.06
CTAK	4.317 	3.500	0.74/0.01	35.81/2.99
Dderiv	31.933/4.267 	31.017/4.283	3.83/0.2	48.02/2.68
Deriv	32.250/4.183	31.350/4.183	3.06/0.18	54.84/2.03
Destructive	9.017	7.383	0.99/0.09	113.85/1.44
Div-iter	5.333	3.117	1.99/0.11	98.85/6.22
DiOAv-rec	5.000	2.667	2.43/0.08	58.96/4.17
FFT	67.083/4.233	66.550/4.217	41.59/2.13	433.94/28.56
Fprint	9.650	9.567	0.6/0.06	0.63/0.03
Fread	3.700	3.333	1.26/0.13	1.23/0.04
Frpoly Power=2 r=x+y+z+1	0.033	0.050	0.0	0.3/0.02
Frpoly Power=2 r2=1000r	0.017 	0.017	0.01	0.17/0.01
Frpoly Power=2 r3=r in flonums	0.017	0.017	0.02	0.18/0.01
Frpoly Power=5 r=x+y+z+1	0.167	0.117	0.02	1.61/0.13
Frpoly Power=5 r2=1000r	0.233	0.183	0.06/0.02	1.72/0.11
OAFrpoly Power=5 r3=r in flonums	0.183	0.150	0.04	1.6/0.16
Frpoly Power=10 r=x+y+z+1	1.517	1.167	0.22/0.02	18.2/1.27
Frpoly Power=10 r2=1000r	2.633	2.283	0.73/0.02	17.69/0.74
Frpoly Power=10 r3=r in flonums	1.900	1.550	0.36/0.01	18.07/0.82
Frpoly Power=15 r=x+y+z+1	9.767	7.567	1.54/0.13	115.77/1.78
Frpoly Power=15 r2=1000r	20.550	18.200	7.25/0.5	124.55/3.61
Frpoly Power=15 r3=r in flonums	12.133	9.867	3.83/0.24	118.95/3.26
Puzzle	69.283 	68.267	20.29/0.87	823.23/46.0
STAK	15.200	15.667	0.77/0.03	45.38/0.86
TAK	1.250	0.700	0.26	29.48/0.26
TAKL	13.100	7.133	0.91	263.66/4.39
TAKR	1.433	0.917	0.38/0.03	29.75/0.56
Tprint	29.883	31.600	0.79/0.04	0.8/0.04
Traverse-init	36.533	35.517	5.57/0.29	913.73/85.41
Traverse	135.017	133.967	20.07/1.17	>2600

Note:  The optimized Allegro column refers to compiled benchmarks including the
form 	(declare (optimize (speed 3) (size 0) (safety 0) ... ) wrapped around
them.  The difference between the Lucid CL benchmarks when compiled and
interpreted is quite marked.  The (C) column refers to files loaded with (load
"file.vbin") after (compile-file "file.cl") has been completed.  The (I) column
refers to files loaded with (load "file.cl"). 

-- 
..........................................................................
Jeffrey Sullivan			  | University of Pittsburgh
···@cadre.dsl.pittsburgh.edu		  | Intelligent Systems Studies Program
······@PittVMS.BITNET, ······@cisunx.UUCP | Graduate Student