st: re: stata 10 vs stata 9

["Feiveson, Alan H. (JSC-SK311)" <alan.h.feiveson@nasa.gov>]

Sergyi - Thanks for the suggestion. Here's what I got using 100000
iterations (no mp2 versions):


Stata 9 (IC)

. forvalues i=1/100000 {
  2.   timer on 1
  3.   quietly regress price weight
  4.   timer off 1
  5. }

. 
. timer list 1
   1:     21.64 /   100000 =       0.0002 

Stata 10 (IC)
. forvalues i=1/100000 {
  2.   timer on 1
  3.   quietly regress price weight
  4.   timer off 1
  5. }

. 
. timer list 1
   1:     27.53 /   100000 =       0.0003


Doesn't look so great for Stata10 , does it?


Al Feiveson




-----Original Message-----
From: owner-statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu
[mailto:owner-statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu] On Behalf Of Sergiy
Radyakin
Sent: Friday, August 24, 2007 12:14 PM
To: statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu
Subject: Re: st: stata 10 mp2 vs stata9

Hello Jitian,

Stata 9 MP with a license for 2 processors will use 2 processors if they
are available.
Stata 10 MP with a license for 1 processor will use 1 processor even if
2 are available.
The difference in performace might be just about 1.5 (since performance
does not grow linearly with n(procs)).

So check if your license covers the same number of processors in version
9 and 10.

Otherwise it is hard to say from the information that you provided. We
know nothing about the program that you are using to test performance.

Try something that you can report here.

I propose the following simple benchmark, which of course is not
representative of all Stata capabilities, but it might be helpful in
locating the cause of decrease in performance:

*** -----------------------------------------
sysuse auto, clear
set more off

timer clear 1

forvalues i=1/10000 {
  timer on 1
  quietly regress price weight
  timer off 1
}

timer list 1

*** -----------------------------------------

Best regards,
   Sergiy Radyakin

On 8/23/07, Jitian Sheu <jtsheu@mail.cgu.edu.tw> wrote:
> Dear listers:
> I am using the latest version of Stata (stata 10 MP2) in my computer 
> (64 bit and 8G Ram) However, I just found the stata 10 does not 
> perform better compared with that in Stata 9.
> I use the same program and run in the same computer.
> Stata 10 is actually 1.5 times slower than stata 9.
> Does anyone have the same experience? And does anyone happen to know 
> how to solve it?
>
> JT
>
>
> *
> *   For searches and help try:
> *   http://www.stata.com/support/faqs/res/findit.html
> *   http://www.stata.com/support/statalist/faq
> *   http://www.ats.ucla.edu/stat/stata/
>
*
*   For searches and help try:
*   http://www.stata.com/support/faqs/res/findit.html
*   http://www.stata.com/support/statalist/faq
*   http://www.ats.ucla.edu/stat/stata/

*
*   For searches and help try:
*   http://www.stata.com/support/faqs/res/findit.html
*   http://www.stata.com/support/statalist/faq
*   http://www.ats.ucla.edu/stat/stata/