On 7/31/07, Justin C. Walker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > While we're extending this, here's my $0.02 canadian (:-}) > > Yep -- Mathematica 5.2 interestingly totally sucks at > > computing the number of partitions on an Intel OSX > > machine... and SAGE rocks. > > Checking partition count computation: > > On a Core 2 Duo 2.33 Mhz, computing the number of partitions of 10^9: > Mathematica 5.2 (PartitionsP[10^9]: 95.5115 s > Sage 2.7.2.1 (number_of_partitions(10^9): 125.2 s > Jon Bober's code (i386: 'jb 1000000000'): 160 s > > I wonder why our Core 2 Duo timings are so different?
SAGE 2.7.2.1 is different than what I just tested, since I had rebuilt mpfr with optimization turned on, which definitely improves the timings to "95seconds". I am surprised that you get 95.5115s out of mathematica, given that it takes 350 seconds with Mathematica to do the same calculation on my laptop. Let's race Mathematica's at the workshop tomorrow :-). > All of the executables are "i386" binaries (32-bit x86). > > One oddity: Jon Bober's code produced a value ending in > '30457526857797923685688339', while Mathematica and SAGE produced one > ending in '30457526831036667979062760', so they differ. You probably have an old version of his code? I think he emailed newer versions to me, which are what's in SAGE, and which he might not have posted to the list. -- William --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel URLs: http://sage.scipy.org/sage/ and http://modular.math.washington.edu/sage/ -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
