Re:Why physicists still use Fortran
by bmh100 on Sunday December 18, 2016 @05:14PM
(#13208006)
There are some important things to note about these benchmarks. On the Mandelbrot set, I noticed that the program does not use arrays despite the obvious 2D-array structure of the bitmap. Two of the four cores were also underutilized. Next, the k-nucleotide, reverse-complement, and fasta programs only utilized a single core, compared to the C programs utilizing multiple cores. It is not clear to me why this should be the case, but it leads me to cast doubt on the tests I listed.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Simple -- those are the programs that have been contributed.
> You will probably come across people saying that the programs are not idiomatic ("enough").
This seems to describe me. I am tempted to rewrite those programs more idiomatically. Thank you for pointing this out.
Please do contribute programs to show your notion of idiomatic!
Isaac, thank you for your (almost :-) indefatigable work for and defence of the benchmarks game.
You're welcome.
I have cut back: x64 single core & x86 quad core are no longer measured, x86 single core updates are not frequent, and x64 quad core updates are less frequent than they used to be (although more frequent than the chart dates might suggest).
I've kind-of been hoping the hardware would fail -- but someone would probably gift me a new machine :-)
From my perspective "defence of the benchmarks game" is a matter of saying "Keep it in perspective" and "Keep it in context" until we do ;-)