Calculation benchmark of micropython in different hardware
-
- Posts: 363
- Joined: Sun Apr 17, 2016 1:55 pm
Calculation benchmark of micropython in different hardware
I have made a compare of calculation benchmark of micropython in different hardware, I hope it will be helpful to you.
Because forum does not support table, so I put result in a picture.
I have made more test, and put it in github:
https://github.com/shaoziyang/micropython_benchmarks
Because forum does not support table, so I put result in a picture.
I have made more test, and put it in github:
https://github.com/shaoziyang/micropython_benchmarks
Last edited by shaoziyang on Sun Aug 26, 2018 8:18 am, edited 1 time in total.
Re: Calculation benchmark of micropython in different hardware
shaoziyang wrote:I have made a compare of calculation benchmark of micropython in different hardware, I hope it will be helpful to you.
Because forum does not support table, so I put result in a picture.
You should place a link to a google spreadsheet (just make sure to make it readonly so only you can modify it).
Also if you’re really interested in providing a complete picture of performance, you should provide the info for each of the emitters: normal, native, viper
- pythoncoder
- Posts: 5956
- Joined: Fri Jul 18, 2014 8:01 am
- Location: UK
- Contact:
Re: Calculation benchmark of micropython in different hardware
Interesting and informative information. It will be interesting to see how the forthcoming Pyboard D-series compares.
Peter Hinch
Index to my micropython libraries.
Index to my micropython libraries.
Re: Calculation benchmark of micropython in different hardware
Very interesting is the comparison of the ESP32 modules with and without PSRAM. That matches the subjective impression, that devices w/o PSRAM are way more responsive.
Re: Calculation benchmark of micropython in different hardware
without warranty: 216M, 1.547, 1.721, 2.839, 4.116pythoncoder wrote: ↑Fri Aug 24, 2018 7:40 amInteresting and informative information. It will be interesting to see how the forthcoming Pyboard D-series compares.
Re: Calculation benchmark of micropython in different hardware
Just a few other numbers:
Teensy 3.6. 180Mhz, 2.65s, 2.78s, 4,14s, 12.2s
Pycom LoPy4: 160MHz, 5.75s, 6.07s, 10.1s, 17.6s
Pcom LoPy: 160MHz, 5.7s, 5.9s, 8.3s, ---
LoBo ESp32 SPRAM: 240MHz, 4.04s, 4.15s, 18.9s, 19.3s
The Pi test shows a substantial variation. The low values for the Div test of the ESP32LoBo & ESP32MP with PSRAM are somewhat strange, compared to e.g. the LoPy4 with PSRAM too (which runs at 160MHz).
Teensy 3.6. 180Mhz, 2.65s, 2.78s, 4,14s, 12.2s
Pycom LoPy4: 160MHz, 5.75s, 6.07s, 10.1s, 17.6s
Pcom LoPy: 160MHz, 5.7s, 5.9s, 8.3s, ---
LoBo ESp32 SPRAM: 240MHz, 4.04s, 4.15s, 18.9s, 19.3s
The Pi test shows a substantial variation. The low values for the Div test of the ESP32LoBo & ESP32MP with PSRAM are somewhat strange, compared to e.g. the LoPy4 with PSRAM too (which runs at 160MHz).
Re: Calculation benchmark of micropython in different hardware
Some more numbers from Pycom LoPy4
[code]
Pycom MicroPython 1.19.0.b2 [v1.9.4-7ec4c0a] on 2018-06-15; LoPy4 with ESP32
>>>
>>> import runtest
Speed test
System freq: 160.0 MHz
Add test: -5.654 s
Add test: -5.656 s
Mul test: -5.953 s
Mul test: -5.954 s
Div test: -10.008 s
Div test: -10.024 s
Pi test: -27.949 s
Pi test: -28.163 s
[/code]
[code]
Pycom MicroPython 1.19.0.b2 [v1.9.4-7ec4c0a] on 2018-06-15; LoPy4 with ESP32
>>>
>>> import runtest
Speed test
System freq: 160.0 MHz
Add test: -5.654 s
Add test: -5.656 s
Mul test: -5.953 s
Mul test: -5.954 s
Div test: -10.008 s
Div test: -10.024 s
Pi test: -27.949 s
Pi test: -28.163 s
[/code]
Re: Calculation benchmark of micropython in different hardware
I modified the test a little bit, packing into the loop 10 times the same operation (add, mul, div) and reducing the loop count by a factor of 10. Some sample numbers:
ESP32 MP : 204 MHz, 1.009 s, 1.201 s, 2.289 s, 8.514 s
ESP32 MP with PSRAM: 240.0 MHz, 1.308 s, 1.498 s, 6.74 s, 15.189 s
LoPy4: 160 MHz, 1.984 s, 2.286 s, 6.304 s, 17.756 s
WiPy2: 160MHz, 1.935 s, 2.231 s, 4.597 s, Fail
PyBoard 1.1: 168 MHz, 1.157 s, 1.312 s, 2.881 s, 10.344 s
Interestingly, on LoPy4 the Pi test in once instance took 47 seconds, but the 17 seconds figure is more consistent over test iterations and device.
ESP32 MP : 204 MHz, 1.009 s, 1.201 s, 2.289 s, 8.514 s
ESP32 MP with PSRAM: 240.0 MHz, 1.308 s, 1.498 s, 6.74 s, 15.189 s
LoPy4: 160 MHz, 1.984 s, 2.286 s, 6.304 s, 17.756 s
WiPy2: 160MHz, 1.935 s, 2.231 s, 4.597 s, Fail
PyBoard 1.1: 168 MHz, 1.157 s, 1.312 s, 2.881 s, 10.344 s
Interestingly, on LoPy4 the Pi test in once instance took 47 seconds, but the 17 seconds figure is more consistent over test iterations and device.
- pythoncoder
- Posts: 5956
- Joined: Fri Jul 18, 2014 8:01 am
- Location: UK
- Contact:
Re: Calculation benchmark of micropython in different hardware
Impressive figures.
But to quote from Basil Fawlty
where did you get that?
Peter Hinch
Index to my micropython libraries.
Index to my micropython libraries.
Re: Calculation benchmark of micropython in different hardware
To quote from Dr. Franklynpythoncoder wrote: ↑Sat Aug 25, 2018 4:23 amImpressive figures.
But to quote from Basil Fawltywhere did you get that?
I would love to tell you, but then, of course...