biep@klipper.UUCP (J. A. "Biep" Durieux) (10/28/85)
Among the many reactions I received upon my request for Lisp machine
comparisons, there was a nice list of testresults by Ralph P. Sobek
( mcvax!inria!lasso!ralph ). Because many people might be interested
in those results, I post them for him to net.ai.
He ran some tests on a variety of LISP workstations while he was at
IJCAI-85, in Los Angeles. Here are the results;
Fibonacci comparisons(1):
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lisp System/Computer Interpreted Compiled Notes
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Xerox 1132 (Dorado) 10.9 sec. 0.145 sec. (2)
Symbolics 3640 10.5 0.158
Lisp/VM (IBM 4381) 12.8 0.45
" " 0.15 (3)
Interlisp 370 (IBM 3083) 1.502 0.189
Xerox 1185/1186 42.03 0.375 (2)
Xerox 1108 (Dandelion) 41.451 0.405
Hewlett Packard 68020 (Common L) 18.3 < 1. (4),(5)
LMI/Zetalisp-Plus 92.78 0.53
Macintosh/Experlisp -- 0.53 (6)
Sun-2 (Franz lisp) 28.51 - (4)
Sun-2 (Lucid Common Lisp) 28.00 0.58
Texas Instruments Explorer 1 min. < 1. (4)
Micro-Vax 2 (Vax Lisp) VMS 181.53 2.54
----------------
(1) Definition of Fibonacci used:
(lambda (n)
(cond ((eq n 1)
1)
((eq n 2)
1)
(t (iplus (fib (sub1 n))
(fib (idifference n 2))))))
Depending on the different versions of lisp, plus had to be used for
iplus, etc. [I suppose, however he did not mention it, that he ran
(fib 20) -- Biep]
(2) Other definitions of Fiboacci can exist: a) a two-branch 'cond' with
an 'or', or b) a selectq definition. The Xerox compiler generates
equivalent code for all 3 definitions.
(3) with fixed number declaration.
(4) Used stop watch.
(5) Has optimizing compiler which 4 levels of speed-up:
none 8.0 times over interpreted
1 11.0
2 16.8
3 23.7
(6) only compiled. Has incremental compiler.
--
Biep.
{seismo|decvax|philabs|garfield|okstate}!mcvax!vu44!biep
Nous aurions souvent honte de nos plus belles actions
si le monde voyait tous les motifs qui les produisent
-- Francois de La Rochefoucauld