[ADMB Users] Benchmarks

Arni Magnusson arnima at hafro.is
Tue Dec 2 14:03:15 PST 2008

I've only performed a crude benchmark using the 'truncreg' example. 
Here's how many seconds it took the model to converge and calculate the 
Hessian, all compiled and run on the same computer (Intel Core 2 Duo 
T7500, 4GB RAM):

  4 linux64 gcc424(admb9)
  8 win32 bcc52(admb5)
10 win32 vc6(admb5)
11 win32 gcc345(admb9)
13 win32 gcc295(admb5)

The results are quite striking, the main factor being that linux64 runs 
on 100% CPU load, using both cores, while WinXP uses only one core. 
Further benchmarking would be worthwhile.


On Tue, 2 Dec 2008, Ian Taylor wrote:

> Arni,
> Thanks for your posts to the ADMB Users list. This new era in which we 
> can voice issues about ADMB and expect to see results is definitely an 
> exciting one.
> Would you be willing to share some of the results of your linux vs 
> windows speed comparison--how much gain to you find?
> I've tried to put together a linux vs. windows speed test with ADMB, 
> but never had a pair of identical computers to do it on. Using dual 
> boot on an old 32 bit single-processor computer (not a good test), the 
> results were mixed (with minimization slightly faster on linux, but 
> MCMC slower). I did find linux 64 to be faster than linux 32 on a 
> different computer. We didn't seem to be a benefit of running the 
> windows 32 bit executable on a windows 64 bit machine, but maybe 
> they'll release ADMB for windows 64 one of these days. Ultimately, 
> however, it seems that nothing makes as big a difference as buying a 
> faster computer.
> Also, do you have access to Microsoft Visual C, which seemed to 
> provide a definite speed boost over the Borland compiler for windows, 
> and might make up any speed deficit of windows-borland vs linux-gcc.

More information about the Users mailing list