Each chart bar shows how many times slower, one ↓ fasta program was, compared to the fastest program.
These are not the only programs that could be written. These are not the only compilers and interpreters. These are not the only programming languages.
Column × shows how many times more each program used compared to the benchmark program that used least.
sort | sort | sort | ||||
× | Program Source Code | CPU secs | Elapsed secs | Memory KB | Code B | ≈ CPU Load |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1.0 | PyPy 3 #4 | 1.36 | 1.37 | 70,148 | 1698 | 4% 1% 2% 1% 3% 100% 2% 2% |
1.3 | PyPy 2 | 1.75 | 1.75 | 77,640 | 900 | 2% 2% 2% 2% 100% 3% 2% 1% |
1.3 | PyPy 3 | 1.77 | 1.78 | 71,184 | 904 | 4% 2% 2% 1% 100% 0% 1% 2% |
1.4 | PyPy 3 #2 | 1.87 | 1.88 | 71,188 | 889 | 5% 1% 1% 1% 3% 2% 99% 1% |
1.5 | Pyston #4 | 2.01 | 2.04 | 8,140 | 1698 | 2% 1% 0% 0% 100% 1% 0% 1% |
1.5 | Graal #4 | 4.07 | 2.11 | 760,276 | 1698 | 41% 26% 19% 19% 16% 37% 88% 48% |
1.6 | Pyston #5 | 4.17 | 2.14 | 66,276 | 2016 | 73% 4% 22% 8% 69% 9% 8% 8% |
1.6 | Graal #3 | 4.11 | 2.17 | 766,268 | 1647 | 41% 21% 12% 27% 93% 6% 8% 31% |
1.7 | PyPy 3 #3 | 2.32 | 2.32 | 70,208 | 1647 | 3% 2% 1% 2% 0% 1% 100% 0% |
1.8 | Cython | 2.51 | 2.52 | 8,880 | 945 | 4% 0% 0% 100% 0% 1% 0% 0% |
1.9 | Nuitka #5 | 5.59 | 2.59 | 72,224 | 2016 | 69% 14% 2% 63% 38% 7% 23% 5% |
1.9 | Python development version #5 | 4.62 | 2.61 | 65,972 | 2016 | 28% 66% 2% 0% 37% 7% 3% 38% |
1.9 | Pyston #3 | 2.64 | 2.64 | 8,264 | 1647 | 100% 0% 1% 0% 0% 1% 1% 0% |
2.0 | Python 3 #5 | 4.91 | 2.71 | 65,720 | 2016 | 44% 38% 4% 3% 60% 0% 26% 12% |
2.2 | Pyston #2 | 2.94 | 2.95 | 8,168 | 889 | 2% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 100% 1% |
2.3 | Nuitka #4 | 3.17 | 3.21 | 11,008 | 1698 | 99% 1% 3% 1% 1% 1% 0% 0% |
2.4 | Python development version #4 | 3.23 | 3.24 | 9,032 | 1698 | 1% 0% 0% 0% 1% 1% 0% 100% |
2.5 | Nuitka #3 | 3.38 | 3.39 | 11,008 | 1647 | 1% 1% 0% 100% 0% 0% 1% 0% |
2.5 | Python 3 #4 | 3.48 | 3.48 | 10,508 | 1698 | 0% 100% 0% 0% 0% 0% 1% 0% |
2.7 | Python development version | 3.70 | 3.70 | 8,940 | 904 | 99% 0% 0% 0% 1% 1% 1% 1% |
2.8 | Python development version #3 | 3.76 | 3.77 | 9,036 | 1647 | 2% 0% 0% 100% 1% 1% 1% 0% |
2.8 | Python development version #2 | 3.82 | 3.84 | 8,964 | 889 | 0% 0% 0% 100% 1% 0% 2% 0% |
2.8 | Python 3 | 3.88 | 3.88 | 10,380 | 904 | 1% 1% 0% 100% 0% 1% 0% 1% |
2.9 | Python 3 #3 | 3.94 | 3.94 | 10,636 | 1647 | 1% 0% 1% 0% 0% 1% 100% 0% |
3.0 | Python 3 #2 | 4.08 | 4.08 | 10,368 | 889 | 1% 100% 1% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% |
3.3 | Nuitka | 4.56 | 4.56 | 11,136 | 904 | 3% 0% 1% 0% 0% 0% 1% 100% |
3.5 | Nuitka #2 | 4.82 | 4.83 | 11,136 | 889 | 2% 0% 1% 0% 100% 1% 0% 0% |
4.3 | Python 2 | 5.87 | 5.91 | 12,988 | 900 | 0% 0% 1% 0% 0% 99% 0% 0% |
8.3 | Graal | 16.30 | 11.40 | 918,804 | 904 | 28% 11% 78% 8% 24% 13% 19% 20% |
8.4 | Graal #2 | 16.35 | 11.51 | 894,296 | 889 | 26% 17% 25% 19% 96% 17% 10% 11% |
15 | Jython | 25.50 | 20.97 | 3,540 | 900 | 28% 13% 13% 12% 22% 32% 1% 2% |
missing benchmark programs | ||||||
IronPython | No program | |||||
Shedskin | No program | |||||
Numba | No program | |||||
MicroPython | No program | |||||
Grumpy | No program | |||||
RustPython | No program |
diff program output N = 1000 with this 10KB output file to check your program is correct before contributing.
We are trying to show the performance of various programming language implementations - so we ask that contributed programs not only give the correct result, but also use the same algorithm to calculate that result.
Each program should
IM = 139968 IA = 3877 IC = 29573 Seed = 42 Random (Max) Seed = (Seed * IA + IC) modulo IM = Max * Seed / IM
We'll use the generated FASTA file as input for other benchmarks (reverse-complement, k-nucleotide).
Random DNA sequences can be based on a variety of Random Models (554KB pdf). You can use Markov chains or independently distributed nucleotides to generate random DNA sequences online.