Some benchmark comparison of MicroPython boards :
- pystone_lomem (with '%g' changed to '%u' in lines 69 and 71 to be compatible with WiPy 1.0, download here), in pystones/second :
* Pyboard v1.1 with MicroPython v1.8.6 : 1,754;
* Pyboard Lite v1.0 with MicroPython v1.8.6 : 1,048;
* WiPy 1.0 with MicroPython v1.8.2-103 : 659;
* ESP8266 with MicroPython v1.8.6-7 : 223 (80 MHz) / 415 (160 MHz);
* BBC Micro:bit with MicroPython v1.7.9 : not enough RAM to run;
* LoPy with MicroPython 0.9.6.b1 : 829;
* WiPy2 with MicroPython 0.9.6.b1 : 836;
* Teensy 3.2 with MicroPython v1.8.6 : 846;
* Teensy 3.5 with MicroPython v1.8.6 : 1086;
* Teensy 3.6 with MicroPython v1.8.6 : 2212;
- PerformanceTest using 'time.ticks_ms' (download here versions with 'pyb.millis', 'time.ticks_ms' and 'microbit.running_time()'), in number of times in 10s :
* Pyboard v1.1 with MicroPython v1.8.6, using 'pyb.millis' : 2,815,970 / 4,610,390 (native) / 8,771,699 (viper);
* Pyboard v1.1 with MicroPython v1.8.6 : 2,783,122;
* Pyboard Lite v1.0 with MicroPython v1.8.6, using 'pyb.millis' : 1,738,503 / 2,686,262 (native) / 5,392,659 (viper);
* Pyboard Lite v1.0 with MicroPython v1.8.6 : 1,732,370;
* WiPy 1.0 with MicroPython v1.8.2-103 : 918,031;
* ESP8266 with MicroPython v1.8.6-7 : 171,145 (80 MHz) / 341,224 (160 MHz);
* BBC Micro:bit with MicroPython v1.7.9 : 168,826;
* LoPy with MicroPython 0.9.6.b1 : 651,394;
* WiPy2 with MicroPython 0.9.6.b1 : 680,488;
* Teensy 3.2 with MicroPython v1.8.6 : 1,041,445;
* Teensy 3.5 with MicroPython v1.8.6 : 1,204,193
* Teensy 3.6 with MicroPython v1.8.6 : 3,451,931;
- hsquare.py (type Ia supernova calculation with float point for 50,000 points), mean time for each calculation in us :
* Pyboard v1.1 with MicroPython v1.8.6 : 83;
* Pyboard Lite v1.0 with MicroPython v1.8.6 : 139;
* WiPy 1.0 with MicroPython v1.8.2-103 : - (no float point support);
* ESP8266 with MicroPython v1.8.6-7 : 460 (80 MHz) / 239 (160 MHz);
* BBC Micro:bit with MicroPython v1.7.9 : 1,589;
* LoPy with MicroPython 0.9.6.b1 : 107;
* WiPy2 with MicroPython 0.9.6.b1 : 143;
* Teensy 3.2 with MicroPython v1.8.6 : 278;
* Teensy 3.5 with MicroPython v1.8.6 : 138
* Teensy 3.6 with MicroPython v1.8.6 : 73.
MicroPython release 0.9.6.b1 (for LoPy and WiPy 2) has default ESP32 frequency set as 160 MHz, instead of 80 MHz as before.
(21/11/2016 : added Teensy 3.x)
(27/11/2016 : updated LoPy and WiPy 2 with firmware 0.9.6.b1)
Benchmark comparison of MicroPython boards
-
- Posts: 106
- Joined: Thu Dec 31, 2015 3:12 pm
Benchmark comparison of MicroPython boards
Last edited by rcolistete on Sun Nov 27, 2016 4:38 am, edited 9 times in total.
- pythoncoder
- Posts: 2485
- Joined: Fri Jul 18, 2014 8:01 am
- Location: UK
- Contact:
Re: Benchmark comparison of MicroPython boards
Very useful information. But this "PerformanceTest" figure looks surprising
LoPy with MicroPython 0.9.4.b1 : 91,810
In other tests the LoPy is 6-7 times slower than the Pyboard 1.1 (standard code emitter), but in that test the factor is slower by a factor of 30. I wonder if there is some specific issue here.
LoPy with MicroPython 0.9.4.b1 : 91,810
In other tests the LoPy is 6-7 times slower than the Pyboard 1.1 (standard code emitter), but in that test the factor is slower by a factor of 30. I wonder if there is some specific issue here.
Peter Hinch
-
- Posts: 106
- Joined: Thu Dec 31, 2015 3:12 pm
Re: Benchmark comparison of MicroPython boards
Pystone is based on Dhrystone, it is considered useful to measure the efficiency of the (Micro)Python implementation (e.g., if Python 2.7.2 is faster than Python 2.7.1), but it is not meant to exactly compare different hardwares.pythoncoder wrote:Very useful information. But this "PerformanceTest" figure looks surprising
LoPy with MicroPython 0.9.4.b1 : 91,810
In other tests the LoPy is 6-7 times slower than the Pyboard 1.1 (standard code emitter), but in that test the factor is slower by a factor of 30. I wonder if there is some specific issue here.
PerformanceTest is very, very simple test. But is cited in many comparisons in our MicroPython community.
So it is natural to see different ratios (e.g. ESP8266/Pyboard 1.1) in speed of both benchmarks.
-
- Posts: 106
- Joined: Thu Dec 31, 2015 3:12 pm
Re: Benchmark comparison of MicroPython boards
Added BBC Micro:bit. Only 'pystone_lowmem' doesn't run due to lack of RAM. I've tried without comments and lower number of 'LOOPS', with no success.
-
- Posts: 106
- Joined: Thu Dec 31, 2015 3:12 pm
Re: Benchmark comparison of MicroPython boards
Added Teensy 3.2, 3.5 and 3.6 benchmarks.
-
- Posts: 106
- Joined: Thu Dec 31, 2015 3:12 pm
Re: Benchmark comparison of MicroPython boards
Sorry for reviving this old thread, but I was wondering where does the OpenMV M7 board rank within this list?
https://openmv.io/
https://openmv.io/
Re: Benchmark comparison of MicroPython boards
Could be interesting to see the new Circuit Playground Express + CircuitPython 2.1.0 in there too !