On Mon, 1 Mar 2004, Toby Ewing wrote:

...

Hi, all

Frank suggested using the CPU timer, and I agree that it's a much better benchmark than the clock timer (I keep discovering gems in gpc.pas!). But I'm getting identical results from the two timers:

var time1, time2 : longCard; dummy, cpu1, cpu2 : integer; .. time1 := GetMicroSecondTime; dummy := 0; cpu1 := GetCPUTime(dummy);

for i := 1 to big do j := randNorm(0.0, 1.0);

dummy := 0; cpu2 := GetCPUTime(dummy); time2 := GetMicroSecondTime; writeln('Time for ', big:1, ' randNorms: ', ((time2-time1)*0.000001):7:2, ' seconds, ', (cpu2-cpu1):5, ' cpu seconds.'); ..

When the computer is idle except for this program, I get: Time for 100000000 randNorms: 171.03 seconds, 171 cpu seconds.

Why not try a program that does user input, say through a readln. When testing, you can delay the input as long as you wish. The net cpu time should be minimal, but the wall clock time obviously increases as you wait. Tom