Emulator vs simulator performance

[Valentin Albillo]

.
Hi, J-F:

(06-05-2020 03:03 PM)J-F Garnier Wrote:  I will not use a trivial benchmark but the program from the latest article from Valentin, that computes the area of the Mandelbrot set (great article, Valentin, I may comment it later in an other thread).

Thank you very much, you're most welcome to comment to your heart's content.

Quote:The program is run to evaluate 10,000 points with the other default parameters. The display is fully static during Valentin's program run (no display updates, no flying goose.

(How do you know it's a "goose" and not a "gander" ? Oh, I remember, the gander flies backwards. At least it does in the HP-41C family, as the HP42S (and Free42) uses a little triangle instead)

Quote:Emu42 and Free42 are run separately, during the run they each use about one of the core of my core-i3 machine (global CPU loading ~25-30%).
Of course, Emu42 is run with authentic calculator speed off.

Emu42 1.24 : 5min08s
Free42 2.5.18 decimal : 6.3s
Free42 2.5.18 binary : 2.0s
Emu42 execution time measured by hand, Free42 execution measured using TIME.

Quite a difference, indeed. Emu42 is calculating ~32 points/sec, Free42 BCD is doing ~1,587 points/sec and Free42 binary does 5,000 points/sec.

The difference between 32 p/s and 5,000 p/s is ~156x, which seems to me unreasonable performance difference for an emulation (Emu42) vs. a simulation (Free42), that's more than two orders of magnitude faster (or slower) on the same hardware (and presumably OS).

Also, your Free42 BCD is running only ~75% faster on your hardware than mine on my mid-range Samsung tablet. Frankly, I would expect it to run much faster in your system (say, at least 4x).

Puzzling results to me, all of them.

Thanks and regards.
V.