Each chart bar shows how many times more Code, one ↓ mandelbrot program used, compared to the program that used least Code.
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.
|×||Program Source Code||CPU secs||Elapsed secs||Memory KB||Code B||≈ CPU Load|
|1.0||Python 3 #6||92.93||12.69||61,740||3852||96% 99% 98% 99% 99% 96% 98% 98%|
|1.0||Nuitka #6||35.79||4.76||62,300||3852||95% 95% 93% 99% 93% 95% 94% 97%|
|1.0||Numba #6||61.51||8.68||133,960||3886||94% 91% 96% 93% 93% 98% 92% 95%|
|missing benchmark programs|
|Python 2||No program|
|PyPy 2||No program|
|Python development version||No program|
|PyPy 3||No program|
cmp program output N = 200 with this 5KB 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 plot the Mandelbrot set [-1.5-i,0.5+i] on an N-by-N bitmap. Write output byte-by-byte in portable bitmap format.
Thanks to Greg Buchholz for this benchmark.