Julia and Mojo Mandelbrot Benchmark
discourse.julialang.org
Julia and Mojo Mandelbrot Benchmark
1–10 of 168 posts
Re: Julia and Mojo Mandelbrot Benchmark
#2Be sure to check out the comments on the page - lots of optimisations for the julia code.
Re: Julia and Mojo Mandelbrot Benchmark
#3tldr: in the test's first implementation mojo was faster but then the refactored and made the julia code faster by 8x over mojo.
that's cool but mojo literally just came out
Re: Julia and Mojo Mandelbrot Benchmark
#4In my opinion, the issue that will make more of a difference in the long run is Mojo's first-class support for AoT compiled binaries (as well as JIT compilation).
Julia's poor AoT support (with small binaries) is a major Achilles heel. I really wish that the Julia developers had taken that more seriously earlier on.
Re: Julia and Mojo Mandelbrot Benchmark
#5tldr: in the test's first implementation mojo was faster but then the refactored and made the julia code faster by 8x over mojo. that's cool but mojo literally just came out
That's not what the presented benchmarks show, though.
Re: Julia and Mojo Mandelbrot Benchmark
#6Whilst the Julia version currently beats Mojo, I fully expect both to approach basically the same performance with enough tinkering, and for that performance to be on par with C or Fortran.
A more interesting question is which version is more elegant, ‘obvious’ and maintainable. (Deeply familiar with both, but money is on Julia).
Re: Julia and Mojo Mandelbrot Benchmark
#7tldr: in the test's first implementation mojo was faster but then the refactored and made the julia code faster by 8x over mojo. that's cool but mojo literally just came out
We have seen many languages cycle in popularity, but Julia is one of the few high-level languages that could actually match... or in some cases exceed C/C++ performance.
There are always tradeoffs, and it usually takes a few weeks for people to come to terms with why Julia is unique.
Definitely falls into the fun category. =)
Re: Julia and Mojo Mandelbrot Benchmark
#8For a similar "benchmark" (also Mandelbrot) but took place in Jax repo discussion: https://github.com/google/jax/discussions/11078#discussionco...
Re: Julia and Mojo Mandelbrot Benchmark
#9In my opinion, the issue that will make more of a difference in the long run is Mojo's first-class support for AoT compiled binaries (as well as JIT compilation). Julia's poor AoT support (with small binaries) is a major Achilles heel. I really wish that the Julia developers had taken that more seriously earlier on.
If anyone is interested in compiling small binaries with Julia do check out staticcompiler.jl and supporting statictools.jl that manages to produce small binaries without the Julia runtime ,
Ofcourse it's a wip , and not fully mature , I'm just putting it out there for people to know.
There's some really cool demonstrations come out of this ...
Wasm fluid simulation in Julia: https://alexander-barth.github.io/FluidSimDemo-WebAssembly/
Differential equations demo in the browser: https://tshort.github.io/Lorenz-WebAssembly-Model.jl/
Someone even setup Julia to run on AVR mcus for Arduino (Directly using gpucompiler which statictools uses to compile to binaries):
https://seelengrab.github.io/articles/Running%20Julia%20bare...