|Subject:||Re: Speed of Ocave vs Matlab?|
|Date:||Tue, 8 Sep 2015 17:12:30 +0200|
Alexander,On 8 Sep 2015, at 10:01, Alexander Barth <address@hidden> wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 7, 2015 at 11:14 PM, Michael Barnes <address@hidden> wrote:
> I just got asked this question at a computer vision conference. Does anyone have any benchmark examples I can quote?
> It strongly depends on the type of benchmark. In my tests, octave turned out the be faster than Matlab:
> (table 4 on page 9, open access journal under creative commons).
> The code needs to solve a sparse system defined by a partial differential equation. Large-parts of the code are vectorized and the only loops are essentially the number of dimensions (which is typically 2 or 3).
> I was actually surprised by this results and I did not perform any optimization specific to octave. I only vectorized the code which is beneficial for octave and Matlab.
> In the above mentioned paper, you will however also find some references where Matlab was faster than Octave.
> The conclusion for me is: if performance is important, you need to vectorize the code as much as possible. This is not only necessary for octave but also for Matlab. If this is not possible, then I use a compiled language like Fortran.
> I hope this helps,
I guess you still have all the scripts to run these tests again?
I would be curiuos to see what is the comparison between Octave 3.6.4 and 4.x,
as a few users reported significant slowdown in some aplications.
|[Prev in Thread]||Current Thread||[Next in Thread]|