c++valarray

Why is valarray so slow?

I am trying to use valarray since it is much like MATLAB while operating vector and matrices. I first did some performance check and found that valarray cannot achieve the performance declared as in the book C++ programming language by Stroustrup.

The test program actually did 5 million multiplication of doubles. I thought that c = a*b would at least be comparable to the for loop double type element multiplication, but I am totally wrong. I tried on several computers and Microsoft Visual C++ 6.0 and Visual Studio 2008.

By the way, I tested on MATLAB using the following code:

len = 5*1024*1024;
a = rand(len, 1);
b = rand(len, 1);
c = zeros(len, 1);
tic;
c = a.*b;
toc;

And the result is 46 ms. This time is not high precision; it only works as a reference.

The code is:

#include <iostream>
#include <valarray>
#include <iostream>
#include "windows.h"

using namespace std;
SYSTEMTIME stime;
LARGE_INTEGER sys_freq;

double gettime_hp();

int main()
{
    enum { N = 5*1024*1024 };
    valarray<double> a(N), b(N), c(N);
    QueryPerformanceFrequency(&sys_freq);
    int i, j;
    for (j=0 ; j<8 ; ++j)
    {
        for (i=0 ; i<N ; ++i)
        {
            a[i] = rand();
            b[i] = rand();
        }

        double* a1 = &a[0], *b1 = &b[0], *c1 = &c[0];
        double dtime = gettime_hp();
        for (i=0 ; i<N ; ++i)
            c1[i] = a1[i] * b1[i];
        dtime = gettime_hp()-dtime;
        cout << "double operator* " << dtime << " ms\n";

        dtime = gettime_hp();
        c = a*b ;
        dtime = gettime_hp() - dtime;
        cout << "valarray operator* " << dtime << " ms\n";

        dtime = gettime_hp();
        for (i=0 ; i<N ; ++i)
            c[i] = a[i] * b[i];
        dtime = gettime_hp() - dtime;
        cout << "valarray[i] operator* " << dtime<< " ms\n";

        cout << "------------------------------------------------------\n";
    }
}

double gettime_hp()
{
    LARGE_INTEGER tick;
    extern LARGE_INTEGER sys_freq;
    QueryPerformanceCounter(&tick);
    return (double)tick.QuadPart * 1000.0 / sys_freq.QuadPart;
}

The running results: (release mode with maximal speed optimization)

double operator* 52.3019 ms
valarray operator* 128.338 ms
valarray[i] operator* 43.1801 ms
------------------------------------------------------
double operator* 43.4036 ms
valarray operator* 145.533 ms
valarray[i] operator* 44.9121 ms
------------------------------------------------------
double operator* 43.2619 ms
valarray operator* 158.681 ms
valarray[i] operator* 43.4871 ms
------------------------------------------------------
double operator* 42.7317 ms
valarray operator* 173.164 ms
valarray[i] operator* 80.1004 ms
------------------------------------------------------
double operator* 43.2236 ms
valarray operator* 158.004 ms
valarray[i] operator* 44.3813 ms
------------------------------------------------------

Debugging mode with same optimization:

double operator* 41.8123 ms
valarray operator* 201.484 ms
valarray[i] operator* 41.5452 ms
------------------------------------------------------
double operator* 40.2238 ms
valarray operator* 215.351 ms
valarray[i] operator* 40.2076 ms
------------------------------------------------------
double operator* 40.5859 ms
valarray operator* 232.007 ms
valarray[i] operator* 40.8803 ms
------------------------------------------------------
double operator* 40.9734 ms
valarray operator* 234.325 ms
valarray[i] operator* 40.9711 ms
------------------------------------------------------
double operator* 41.1977 ms
valarray operator* 234.409 ms
valarray[i] operator* 41.1429 ms
------------------------------------------------------
double operator* 39.7754 ms
valarray operator* 234.26 ms
valarray[i] operator* 39.6338 ms
------------------------------------------------------
Solution

  • I suspect that the reason c = a*b is so much slower than performing the operations an element at a time is that the 

    template<class T> valarray<T> operator*
    (const valarray<T>&, const valarray<T>&);

    operator must allocate memory to put the result into, then returns that by value.

    Even if a "swaptimization" is used to perform the copy, that function still has the overhead of