Home/ Questions/Q 110597
In Process

The Archive Base Latest Questions

Editorial Team
  • 0
Asked: 2026-05-11T02:15:07+00:00

I am trying to compare the performance of boost::multi_array to native dynamically allocated arrays,

  • 0

I am trying to compare the performance of boost::multi_array to native dynamically allocated arrays, with the following test program:

#include <windows.h> #define _SCL_SECURE_NO_WARNINGS #define BOOST_DISABLE_ASSERTS  #include <boost/multi_array.hpp>  int main(int argc, char* argv[]) {     const int X_SIZE = 200;     const int Y_SIZE = 200;     const int ITERATIONS = 500;     unsigned int startTime = 0;     unsigned int endTime = 0;      // Create the boost array     typedef boost::multi_array<double, 2> ImageArrayType;     ImageArrayType boostMatrix(boost::extents[X_SIZE][Y_SIZE]);      // Create the native array     double *nativeMatrix = new double [X_SIZE * Y_SIZE];      //------------------Measure boost----------------------------------------------     startTime = ::GetTickCount();     for (int i = 0; i < ITERATIONS; ++i)     {         for (int y = 0; y < Y_SIZE; ++y)         {             for (int x = 0; x < X_SIZE; ++x)             {                 boostMatrix[x][y] = 2.345;             }         }     }     endTime = ::GetTickCount();     printf('[Boost] Elapsed time: %6.3f seconds\n', (endTime - startTime) / 1000.0);      //------------------Measure native-----------------------------------------------     startTime = ::GetTickCount();     for (int i = 0; i < ITERATIONS; ++i)     {         for (int y = 0; y < Y_SIZE; ++y)         {             for (int x = 0; x < X_SIZE; ++x)             {                 nativeMatrix[x + (y * X_SIZE)] = 2.345;             }         }     }     endTime = ::GetTickCount();     printf('[Native]Elapsed time: %6.3f seconds\n', (endTime - startTime) / 1000.0);      return 0; }

I get the following results:

[Boost] Elapsed time: 12.500 seconds [Native]Elapsed time:  0.062 seconds

I can’t believe multi_arrays are that much slower. Can anyone spot what I am doing wrong?

I assume caching is not an issue since I am doing writes to memory.

EDIT: This was a debug build. Per Laserallan’s suggest I did a release build:

[Boost] Elapsed time:  0.266 seconds [Native]Elapsed time:  0.016 seconds

Much closer. But 16 to 1 still seems to high to me.

Well, no definitive answer, but I’m going to move on and leave my real code with native arrays for now.

Accepting Laserallan’s answer because it was the biggest flaw in my test.

Thanks to all.

Share

Leave an answer

You must login to add an answer.

Need An Account,

1 Answer

  1. Are you building release or debug?

    If running in debug mode, the boost array might be really slow because their template magic isn’t inlined properly giving lots of overhead in function calls. I’m not sure how multi array is implemented though so this might be totally off 🙂

    Perhaps there is some difference in storage order as well so you might be having your image stored column by column and writing it row by row. This would give poor cache behavior and may slow down things.

    Try switching the order of the X and Y loop and see if you gain anything. There is some info on the storage ordering here: http://www.boost.org/doc/libs/1_37_0/libs/multi_array/doc/user.html

    EDIT: Since you seem to be using the two dimensional array for image processing you might be interested in checking out boosts image processing library gil.

    It might have arrays with less overhead that works perfectly for your situation.

    • 0