Re: [Numpy-discussion] Execution time difference between 2.7 and 3.2 using numpy

On 23/03/2013 12:05 AM, Chris Barker - NOAA Federal wrote: On Fri, Mar 22, 2013 at 2:39 PM, Colin J. Williams wrote: I have updated to numpy 1.7.0 for each of the Pythons 2.7.3, 3.2.3 and 3.3.0. ... The tests, which are

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Execution time difference between 2.7 and 3.2 using numpy

On 23/03/2013 11:17 AM, Daπid wrote: I am a bit worried about the differences in results. Just to be sure you are comparing apples with apples, it may be a good idea to set the seed at the beginning: np.random.seed( SEED ) where SEED is an int. This way, you will be inv

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Execution time difference between 2.7 and 3.2 using numpy

I am a bit worried about the differences in results. Just to be sure you are comparing apples with apples, it may be a good idea to set the seed at the beginning: np.random.seed( SEED ) where SEED is an int. This way, you will be inverting always the same matrix, regardless of the Python version.

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Execution time difference between 2.7 and 3.2 using numpy

On 23/03/2013 7:21 AM, Ralf Gommers wrote: On Fri, Mar 22, 2013 at 10:39 PM, Colin J. Williams wrote: On 20/03/2013 11:12 AM, Frédéric Bastien

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Execution time difference between 2.7 and 3.2 using numpy

On Sat, Mar 23, 2013 at 12:23 PM, Todd wrote: > On Sat, Mar 23, 2013 at 12:21 PM, Ralf Gommers wrote: > >> >> That's not the case. The official binaries for NumPy and SciPy are on >> SourceForge. The Windows installers on PyPI are there to make easy_install >> work, but they're likely slower than

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Execution time difference between 2.7 and 3.2 using numpy

On Sat, Mar 23, 2013 at 12:21 PM, Ralf Gommers wrote: > > That's not the case. The official binaries for NumPy and SciPy are on > SourceForge. The Windows installers on PyPI are there to make easy_install > work, but they're likely slower than the SF installers (no SSE2/SSE3 > instructions). > > R

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Execution time difference between 2.7 and 3.2 using numpy

On Fri, Mar 22, 2013 at 10:39 PM, Colin J. Williams wrote: > On 20/03/2013 11:12 AM, Frédéric Bastien wrote: > > On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 11:01 AM, Colin J. Williams > wrote: > > On 20/03/2013 10:30 AM, Frédéric Bastien wrote: > > Hi, > > win32 do not mean it is a 32 bits windows. sys.platform

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Execution time difference between 2.7 and 3.2 using numpy

On Fri, Mar 22, 2013 at 2:39 PM, Colin J. Williams wrote: > I have updated to numpy 1.7.0 for each of the Pythons 2.7.3, 3.2.3 and > 3.3.0. ... > The tests, which are available > here(http://web.ncf.ca/cjw/FP%20Summary%20over%20273-323-330.txt), show that > 3.2 is slower, but not to the same degre

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Execution time difference between 2.7 and 3.2 using numpy

On 20/03/2013 11:12 AM, Frédéric Bastien wrote: On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 11:01 AM, Colin J. Williams wrote: On 20/03/2013 10:30 AM, Frédéric Bastien wrote: Hi, win32 do not mean it is a 32 bits windows. sys.platform always return

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Execution time difference between 2.7 and 3.2 using numpy

On 20/03/2013 11:12 AM, Frédéric Bastien wrote: On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 11:01 AM, Colin J. Williams wrote: On 20/03/2013 10:30 AM, Frédéric Bastien wrote: Hi, win32 do not mean it is a 32 bits windows. sys.platform always retur

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Execution time difference between 2.7 and 3.2 using numpy

On 20/03/2013 11:06 AM, Jens Nielsen wrote: The python3 version is compiled without any optimised library and is falling back on a slow version. Where did you get this installation from? Jens From the

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Execution time difference between 2.7 and 3.2 using numpy

On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 11:01 AM, Colin J. Williams wrote: > On 20/03/2013 10:30 AM, Frédéric Bastien wrote: >> >> Hi, >> >> win32 do not mean it is a 32 bits windows. sys.platform always return >> win32 on 32bits and 64 bits windows even for python 64 bits. >> >> But that is a good question, is y

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Execution time difference between 2.7 and 3.2 using numpy

The python3 version is compiled without any optimised library and is falling back on a slow version. Where did you get this installation from? Jens On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 3:01 PM, Colin J. Williams wrote: > On 20/03/2013 10:30 AM, Frédéric Bastien wrote: > > Hi, > > > > win32 do not mean it is

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Execution time difference between 2.7 and 3.2 using numpy

On 20/03/2013 10:30 AM, Frédéric Bastien wrote: > Hi, > > win32 do not mean it is a 32 bits windows. sys.platform always return > win32 on 32bits and 64 bits windows even for python 64 bits. > > But that is a good question, is your python 32 or 64 bits? 32 bits. Colin W. > > Fred > > On Wed, Mar 2

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Execution time difference between 2.7 and 3.2 using numpy

On 20/03/2013 10:29 AM, Jens Nielsen wrote: Hi,  Could also be that they are linked to different libs such as atlas and standart Blas. What is the output of  numpy.show_config() in the two different python versio

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Execution time difference between 2.7 and 3.2 using numpy

On 20/03/2013 10:14 AM, Daπid wrote: Without much detailed knowledge of the topic, I would expect both versions to give very similar timing, as it is essentially a call to ATLAS function, not much is done in Python. Given this, maybe the difference is in ATLAS itself. Ho

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Execution time difference between 2.7 and 3.2 using numpy

Hi, win32 do not mean it is a 32 bits windows. sys.platform always return win32 on 32bits and 64 bits windows even for python 64 bits. But that is a good question, is your python 32 or 64 bits? Fred On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 10:14 AM, Daπid wrote: > Without much detailed knowledge of the topic,

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Execution time difference between 2.7 and 3.2 using numpy

Hi, Could also be that they are linked to different libs such as atlas and standart Blas. What is the output of numpy.show_config() in the two different python versions. Jens On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 2:14 PM, Daπid wrote: > Without much detailed knowledge of the topic, I would expect both > ve

Re: [Numpy-discussion] Execution time difference between 2.7 and 3.2 using numpy

Without much detailed knowledge of the topic, I would expect both versions to give very similar timing, as it is essentially a call to ATLAS function, not much is done in Python. Given this, maybe the difference is in ATLAS itself. How have you installed it? When you compile ATLAS, it will do some

[Numpy-discussion] Execution time difference between 2.7 and 3.2 using numpy

I have a small program which builds random matrices for increasing matrix orders, inverts the matrix and checks the precision of the product.  At some point, one would expect operations to fail, when the memory capacity is exceeded.  In both Python 2.7 and