Hello, I have two codes that are doing the exact same thing. I put them below. In the latter one, we use a multi-dimensional array instead of x. The former one is substantially faster than the other, and uses smaller number of allocations. What is the reason of it? Thanks in advance. — x = [0.76…

To add to what John said, I recommend checking out the BenchmarkTools.jl package for a more comprehensive (and easy to use!) approach to benchmarking.

using BenchmarkTools foo(x,y) = dot(x[:,1,1,1], y) bar(x,y) = @inbounds dot(x[:,1,1,1], y) baz(x,y) = dot(x, y) x = [0.76,-1.13,1.33]; X = zeros(3,3,3,100); X[:,1,1,1] = x; y = [1.,2,3] @benchmark foo($X,$y) @benchmark bar($X,$y) @benchmark baz($x,$y) julia> @benchmark foo($X,$y) BenchmarkTools.…

Performance difference between two code

New to Julia

johnmyleswhite January 18, 2017, 12:23am 2

This might be because indexing allocates memory, but it’s hard to tell for sure since you seem to be benchmarking in the global scope which causes problems.

CSV Reading (rewrite in C?)

Topic		Replies	Views
Why fewer memory allocations does not necessarily suggest higher speed New to Julia performance , memory-allocation	5	849	June 6, 2021
Performance vs # of Alloc Unintuitive behavior New to Julia question , performance	11	395	December 3, 2025
Migrating code from Matlab: Accessing arrays without allocating Performance	20	2071	November 19, 2018
Memory allocation and usage of dot notation Performance question	6	456	October 19, 2022
Allocations and time of running the same program twice are orders of magnitude larger than running them separately New to Julia performance , memory-allocation , benchmark	11	760	June 17, 2024

Performance difference between two code

Related topics