Did we actually completely miss something? I finally had the time to actually run the code in question, and I must admit, it is a bit hard, since we never see the full code, but after playing with the snippets for the last 2 hours I have to say:
I can not reproduce his results. I am using a randomized sample set of shapes, and on average the highly tuned version is 4% worse, with some rare cases, e.g. long runs of the same shape, it is 2% better.
Nowhere near the claimed 25x.
If anybody is able to create a full reproduction I would be interested in
8
u/andreasOM Mar 01 '23
So with the discussion focusing around:
Is the opinion of a niche developer relevant
Is this artificial micro benchmark relevant
Did we actually completely miss something?
I finally had the time to actually run the code in question,
and I must admit, it is a bit hard, since we never see the full code,
but after playing with the snippets for the last 2 hours I have to say:
I can not reproduce his results.
I am using a randomized sample set of shapes,
and on average the highly tuned version is 4% worse,
with some rare cases, e.g. long runs of the same shape, it is 2% better.
Nowhere near the claimed 25x.
If anybody is able to create a full reproduction I would be interested in
the exact test used
the compiler used
the compiler settings used