Performance of int/long in Python 3

[Chris Angelico]

On Wed, Mar 27, 2013 at 12:38 AM, Cousin Stanley
<cousinstanley at gmail.com> wrote:
> Chris Angelico wrote:
>
>> Interesting, so your 3.x sum() is optimizing something somewhere.
>> Strange. Are we both running the same Python ?
>>
>> I got those from apt-get
>> ....
>
>   I also installed python here under Debian Wheezy
>   via apt-get and our versions look to be the same ....
>
>   -sk-
>
>     2.7.3 (default, Jan  2 2013, 16:53:07)   [GCC 4.7.2]
>
>     3.2.3 (default, Feb 20 2013, 17:02:41)   [GCC 4.7.2]
>
>     CPU :  Intel(R) Celeron(R) D CPU 3.33GHz
>
>
>   -ca-
>
>     2.7.3 (default, Jan  2 2013, 13:56:14)   [GCC 4.7.2]
>
>     3.2.3 (default, Feb 20 2013, 14:44:27)   [GCC 4.7.2]
>
>     CPU :  ???
>
>
>   Could differences in underlying CPU architecture
>   lead to our differing python integer results ?

Doubtful. I have Intel(R) Core(TM) i5-2500 CPU @ 3.30GHz quad-core
with hyperthreading, but I'm only using one core for this job. I've
run the tests several times and each time, Py2 is a shade under two
seconds for inline/range_sum, and Py3 is about 2.5 seconds for each.
Fascinating.

Just for curiosity's sake, I spun up the tests on my reiplophobic
server, still running Ubuntu Karmic. Pentium(R) Dual-Core  CPU
E6500  @ 2.93GHz.

gideon at gideon:~$ python inttime.py
2.6.4 (r264:75706, Dec  7 2009, 18:45:15)
[GCC 4.4.1]
inline: 2147450880
2.7050409317
range_sum: 2147450880
2.64918494225
forloop: 2147450880
6.58765792847
forloop_offset: 2147450880L
16.5167789459
gideon at gideon:~$ python3 inttime.py
3.1.1+ (r311:74480, Nov  2 2009, 14:49:22)
[GCC 4.4.1]
inline: 2147450880
4.44533085823
range_sum: 2147450880
4.37314105034
forloop: 2147450880
12.4834370613
forloop_offset: 2147450880
13.5000522137

Once again, Py3 is slower on small integers than Py2. So where's the
difference with your system? This is really weird! I assume you can
repeat the tests and get the same result every time?

ChrisA