time.clock() or time.time()

[Peter Hansen]

Magnus Lycka wrote:
> On Windows, you're likely to prefer time.clock(), to
> measure relative times, since time.time() will have too low resolution
> for measuring short thingies. 

Specifically, using the NT/XP family of Windows operating systems 
time.time() has a resolution of approximately 0.015 seconds (I believe 
it might be exactly 1/64 second, but it should be easy to confirm with a 
google search).