From: Jan Simon on
Dear Freund!

> Intel(R) Core(TM)2 Duo CPU
> E6850 @ 3.00GHz
>
> Both execution times = 0.2703 seconds.

Amazing! Which Matlab?
Thank you very much. This helps me a lot.
Jan
From: aarif on
x = rand(88999, 1);
tic; for i = 1:1000; v = sum(x); clear('v'); end; toc;
Elapsed time is 0.283402 seconds.

x = rand(89000, 1);
tic; for i = 1:1000; v = sum(x); clear('v'); end; toc;
Elapsed time is 0.282451 seconds.

Athalon 64 X2 2.4 GHz
Matlab 7.4 (2007a)
From: Bruno Luong on
% 2010A 64 bit Prerelease
% Vista
% Intel core 2 duo E8500, 3.16 GHz

x = rand(88999, 1);
tic;
for i = 1:1000;
v = sum(x);
clear('v');
end
toc % Elapsed time is 0.102085 seconds.

x = rand(89000, 1);
tic;
for i = 1:1000;
v = sum(x);
clear('v');
end
toc % Elapsed time is 0.107495 seconds.

% Bruno

% PS: Jan, do you know putting many statements on the same line might
% slow down the code?
From: Rune Allnor on
On 22 Feb, 18:37, "Jan Simon" <matlab.THIS_Y...(a)nMINUSsimon.de> wrote:
> Dear Rune!
>
> > Before you draw your conclusions, check out a simple test I
> > made.
>
> Thank you for answering and spending time to discuss about C-compilers.

Well, if you aren't interested, I am a bit surprised that you
brought up the subject in the first place - mind you; you *did*
criticize matlab by comparing it to C. That alone is sufficient
reason to question if you understand your own comparision.

But of course, when matlab seems to loose on speed compared to
C with those kinds of numbers...?

Rune
From: Oleg Komarov on
Intel Core 2 Duo 2.5 GHz Vista 32 R2009b

intervals = 10000:100:100000;
time = zeros(numel(intervals),1);
for ii = 1:numel(intervals)
x = rand(intervals(ii),1);
tic;
for jj = 1:1000;
v = sum(x);
clear('v');
end
time(ii) = toc;
end

plot(intervals, time)

http://drop.io/8bempju

time drops around the 89.. limit

Oleg