Sign Up

Sign Up to our social questions and Answers Engine to ask questions, answer people’s questions, and connect with other people.

Have an account? Sign In

Have an account? Sign In Now

Sign In

Login to our social questions & Answers Engine to ask questions answer people’s questions & connect with other people.

Sign Up Here

Forgot Password?

Don't have account, Sign Up Here

Forgot Password

Lost your password? Please enter your email address. You will receive a link and will create a new password via email.

Have an account? Sign In Now

You must login to ask a question.

Forgot Password?

Need An Account, Sign Up Here

Please briefly explain why you feel this question should be reported.

Please briefly explain why you feel this answer should be reported.

Please briefly explain why you feel this user should be reported.

Sign InSign Up

The Archive Base

The Archive Base Logo The Archive Base Logo

The Archive Base Navigation

  • Home
  • SEARCH
  • About Us
  • Blog
  • Contact Us
Search
Ask A Question

Mobile menu

Close
Ask a Question
  • Home
  • Add group
  • Groups page
  • Feed
  • User Profile
  • Communities
  • Questions
    • New Questions
    • Trending Questions
    • Must read Questions
    • Hot Questions
  • Polls
  • Tags
  • Badges
  • Buy Points
  • Users
  • Help
  • Buy Theme
  • SEARCH
Home/ Questions/Q 6132329
In Process

The Archive Base Latest Questions

Editorial Team
  • 0
Editorial Team
Asked: May 23, 20262026-05-23T17:05:21+00:00 2026-05-23T17:05:21+00:00

Here’s a loop that I’ve tried with std::vector<double> and with plain old double* .

  • 0

Here’s a loop that I’ve tried with std::vector<double> and with plain old double*.

For 10 million elements, the vector version consistently runs in about 80% of the time that the double* version takes; for pretty much any value of N, vector is notably faster.

Peeking at the GCC STL source code, I don’t see that std::vector is doing anything essentially fancier than what the double* idiom is doing (i.e., allocate with plain old new[], operator[] dereferences an offset). This question speaks to that, too.

Any ideas why the vector version is faster?

Compiler: GCC 4.6.1
Example compile line: g++ -Ofast -march=native -DNDEBUG \
                      -ftree-vectorizer-verbose=2 -o vector.bin \
                      vector.cpp -lrt
OS: CentOS 5
CPU: Opteron 8431
RAM: 128 GB

Results are qualitatively the same if I use icpc 11.1 or run on a Xeon. Also, the vectorizer dump says that only the fill operation in std::vector‘s constructor was vectorized.

The vector version:

#include <vector>
#include <iostream>
#include <boost/lexical_cast.hpp>
#include "util.h"
#include "rkck_params.h"

using namespace std;

int main( int argc, char* argv[] )
{
    const size_t N = boost::lexical_cast<size_t>( argv[ 1 ] );

    vector<double> y_old( N );
    vector<double> y_new( N );
    vector<double> y_err( N );
    vector<double> k0( N );
    vector<double> k1( N );
    vector<double> k2( N );
    vector<double> k3( N );
    vector<double> k4( N );
    vector<double> k5( N );

    const double h = 0.5;

    const timespec start = clock_tick();
    for ( size_t i = 0 ; i < N ; ++i )
    {
        y_new[ i ] =   y_old[ i ]
                     + h
                      *(
                           rkck::c[ 0 ]*k0[ i ]
                         + rkck::c[ 2 ]*k2[ i ]
                         + rkck::c[ 3 ]*k3[ i ]
                         + rkck::c[ 5 ]*k5[ i ]
                       );
        y_err[ i ] =  h
                     *(
                          rkck::cdiff[ 0 ]*k0[ i ]
                        + rkck::cdiff[ 2 ]*k2[ i ]
                        + rkck::cdiff[ 3 ]*k3[ i ]
                        + rkck::cdiff[ 4 ]*k4[ i ]
                        + rkck::cdiff[ 5 ]*k5[ i ]
                      );
    }
    const timespec stop = clock_tick();
    const double total_time = seconds( start, stop );

    // Output
    cout << "vector\t" << N << "\t" << total_time << endl;

    return 0;
}

The double* version:

#include <iostream>
#include <boost/lexical_cast.hpp>
#include "util.h"
#include "rkck_params.h"

using namespace std;

int main( int argc, char* argv[] )
{
    const size_t N = boost::lexical_cast<size_t>( argv[ 1 ] );

    double* y_old = new double[ N ];
    double* y_new = new double[ N ];
    double* y_err = new double[ N ];
    double* k0 = new double[ N ];
    double* k1 = new double[ N ];
    double* k2 = new double[ N ];
    double* k3 = new double[ N ];
    double* k4 = new double[ N ];
    double* k5 = new double[ N ];

    const double h = 0.5;

    const timespec start = clock_tick();
    for ( size_t i = 0 ; i < N ; ++i )
    {
        y_new[ i ]
            =   y_old[ i ]
              + h
               *(
                    rkck::c[ 0 ]*k0[ i ]
                  + rkck::c[ 2 ]*k2[ i ]
                  + rkck::c[ 3 ]*k3[ i ]
                  + rkck::c[ 5 ]*k5[ i ]
                );
        y_err[ i ]
            =  h
              *(
                   rkck::cdiff[ 0 ]*k0[ i ]
                 + rkck::cdiff[ 2 ]*k2[ i ]
                 + rkck::cdiff[ 3 ]*k3[ i ]
                 + rkck::cdiff[ 4 ]*k4[ i ]
                 + rkck::cdiff[ 5 ]*k5[ i ]
               );
    }
    const timespec stop = clock_tick();
    const double total_time = seconds( start, stop );

    delete [] y_old;
    delete [] y_new;
    delete [] y_err;
    delete [] k0;
    delete [] k1;
    delete [] k2;
    delete [] k3;
    delete [] k4;
    delete [] k5;

    // Output
    cout << "plain\t" << N << "\t" << total_time << endl;

    return 0;
}

rkck_params.h:

#ifndef RKCK_PARAMS_H
#define RKCK_PARAMS_H

namespace rkck
{

// C.f. $c_i$ in Ch. 16.2 of NR in C++, 2nd ed.
const double c[ 6 ]
    = { 37.0/378.0,
        0.0,
        250.0/621.0,
        125.0/594,
        0.0,
        512.0/1771.0 };

// C.f. $( c_i - c_i^* )$ in Ch. 16.2 of NR in C++, 2nd ed.
const double cdiff[ 6 ]
    = { c[ 0 ] - 2825.0/27648.0,
        c[ 1 ] - 0.0,
        c[ 2 ] - 18575.0/48384.0,
        c[ 3 ] - 13525.0/55296.0,
        c[ 4 ] - 277.0/14336.0,
        c[ 5 ] - 1.0/4.0 };

}

#endif

util.h:

#ifndef UTIL_H
#define UTIL_H

#include <time.h>
#include <utility>

inline timespec clock_tick()
{
    timespec tick;
    clock_gettime( CLOCK_REALTIME, &tick );
    return tick;
}

// \cite{www.guyrutenberg.com/2007/09/22/profiling-code-using-clock_gettime}
inline double seconds( const timespec& earlier, const timespec& later )
{
    double seconds_diff = -1.0;
    double nano_diff = -1.0;

    if ( later.tv_nsec < earlier.tv_nsec )
    {
        seconds_diff = later.tv_sec - earlier.tv_sec - 1;
        nano_diff = ( 1.0e9 + later.tv_nsec - earlier.tv_nsec )*1.0e-9;
    }
    else
    {
        seconds_diff = later.tv_sec - earlier.tv_sec;
        nano_diff = ( later.tv_nsec - earlier.tv_nsec )*1.0e-9;
    }

    return seconds_diff + nano_diff;
}

#endif
  • 1 1 Answer
  • 0 Views
  • 0 Followers
  • 0
Share
  • Facebook
  • Report

Leave an answer
Cancel reply

You must login to add an answer.

Forgot Password?

Need An Account, Sign Up Here

1 Answer

  • Voted
  • Oldest
  • Recent
  • Random
  1. Editorial Team
    Editorial Team
    2026-05-23T17:05:23+00:00Added an answer on May 23, 2026 at 5:05 pm

    In the vector version your data is initialized to zero. In the new version it’s uninitialized, so different work might be done.

    Did you run multiple times, in different orders?

    • 0
    • Reply
    • Share
      Share
      • Share on Facebook
      • Share on Twitter
      • Share on LinkedIn
      • Share on WhatsApp
      • Report

Sidebar

Related Questions

Here's a basic regex technique that I've never managed to remember. Let's say I'm
Here is the issue I am having: I have a large query that needs
Here's my scenario - I have an SSIS job that depends on another prior
Here is my code, which takes two version identifiers in the form 1, 5,
Here's a coding problem for those that like this kind of thing. Let's see
Here is the scenario: I'm writing an app that will watch for any changes
Here we go again, the old argument still arises... Would we better have a
Here's a strange question for you guys, I have a nice sorted list that
Here is my persistence.xml : <?xml version=1.0 encoding=UTF-8?> <persistence xmlns=http://java.sun.com/xml/ns/persistence xmlns:xsi=http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance xsi:schemaLocation=http://java.sun.com/xml/ns/persistence http://java.sun.com/xml/ns/persistence/persistence_1_0.xsd version=1.0>
Here's a query that works fine: SELECT rowid as msg_rowid, a, b, c FROM

Explore

  • Home
  • Add group
  • Groups page
  • Communities
  • Questions
    • New Questions
    • Trending Questions
    • Must read Questions
    • Hot Questions
  • Polls
  • Tags
  • Badges
  • Users
  • Help
  • SEARCH

Footer

© 2021 The Archive Base. All Rights Reserved
With Love by The Archive Base

Insert/edit link

Enter the destination URL

Or link to existing content

    No search term specified. Showing recent items. Search or use up and down arrow keys to select an item.