Prime Numbers Discussion -[Results Included]-

**Pino** · Sep 28th, 2004, 03:26 AM

Ok you will all be gald to know me and the other moderators have began marking your entries! We will get the results to you as soon as we can

For now if you wish to discuss the contest or any of the entries which are now visible, please post here

PINO

**wossname** · Sep 29th, 2004, 02:35 AM

If you download my app, DO NOT open the form in the form designer, because that messes it up, instead right-click the form in the project explorer and then click <View Code>.

Then expand the regions to find my code.

Thanks to Mendhak for pointing this out.

**manavo11** · Sep 29th, 2004, 06:56 AM

Originally posted by wossname
If you download my app, DO NOT open the form in the form designer, because that messes it up, instead right-click the form in the project explorer and then click <View Code>.

Then expand the regions to find my code.

Thanks to Mendhak for pointing this out.

Took me a while to realise

**EricDalnas** · Sep 30th, 2004, 02:56 PM

The waiting is killing me. Did I make at least second to last or what?!

**Pino** · Sep 30th, 2004, 03:48 PM

hehe! wont be long now and we will get the results to you

**mendhak** · Oct 1st, 2004, 04:40 AM

... said the evil 666 squirrel...

**RobDog888** · Oct 1st, 2004, 08:18 PM

How about posting what you got so far and posting the rest
as you finish them???

**wossname** · Oct 2nd, 2004, 05:25 AM

Come on mods! Where's my result? Haul ass guys, it doesnt take a whole week to test this many entries.

*Whip sound effects*

**Pino** · Oct 2nd, 2004, 06:27 AM

Results Are In!!!

VB . Net Entries

Code:

Name        Mark
______________________
nokia8210	44
lesssalter	50
ericdalnas	60
digiesh 	64
ntg	        68
arun.ns	        69
space.27	74
mendhak	        79
wossname	99  <<< Winner!!!!

Thanks for everyone who entered! And well done to wossname

VB 6 Entries

Code:

Mark   Name
__________________
VbasicGirl               	33
Acidic                          37
BPD                        	38
NotLKH                      	39
Cyborg                     	39
Riis                            46
RobDog                  	55
BodwardUK                  	59
StephenHickerson	        63
Ex-FB                      	65
Dsheller                 	68
Merri                      	74
NoteMe                  	78
SeniorBadger              	85
Dave Sell              	        92 <<< winner
__________________

Thanks for everyone who entered! And well done to Dave Sell

**TheVader** · Oct 2nd, 2004, 06:32 AM

(errr, *cough* you'd better spell Bodwad's name correctly, before he reads this....

)

**mendhak** · Oct 2nd, 2004, 06:49 AM

Bodwad just PWND EVERYONE'S butts!!

W00t!!!!!!!!

**Pino** · Oct 2nd, 2004, 06:53 AM

my appoligise for incorrect names i'll try and get them fixed

and yes bodwards entry was VERY good but davesell was also very close to taking gold

**Electroman** · Oct 2nd, 2004, 07:52 AM

Posted by Pino
my appoligise for incorrect names i'll try and get them fixed

and yes bodwards entry was VERY good but davesell was also very close to taking gold

I edited it to correct it then you edited it and made it say BodwardUK again

**wossname** · Oct 2nd, 2004, 08:38 AM

Good competition everyone

Very enjoyable.

What was the prize? I've forgotten.

**Ex-FB** · Oct 2nd, 2004, 09:15 AM

Congratulations chaps! And thanks it was great fun to do!

**NotLKH** · Oct 2nd, 2004, 10:34 AM

Originally posted by wossname
Good competition everyone

Very enjoyable.

What was the prize? I've forgotten.

1000 Postcounts to the top dogs,
300 to the to the top 50 %
100 to the last place winners.

and Kudos to the Judges!!!

**RobDog888** · Oct 2nd, 2004, 12:18 PM

Congratulations to BodwadUK and wossname on winning!

NotLKH, the prize is a temporary custom title of something
like "Contest Winner" I think.

**NoteMe** · Oct 2nd, 2004, 01:31 PM

Bodwad for Prime Minister....

**StevenHickerson** · Oct 2nd, 2004, 02:47 PM

Stephen... arg.. I hate that spelling!

At least I didn't do as bad as I thought.. although I wish you would've posted average timings rather than just marks. I was more interested in seeing everyones times lol. Oh well guess I can go download everyones.

**Pino** · Oct 2nd, 2004, 03:40 PM

Originally posted by StevenHickerson
Stephen... arg.. I hate that spelling!

At least I didn't do as bad as I thought.. although I wish you would've posted average timings rather than just marks. I was more interested in seeing everyones times lol. Oh well guess I can go download everyones.

changed it for you

**Ex-FB** · Oct 2nd, 2004, 07:36 PM

Er, Just out of curiosity how was the marking weighed between speed and design.

Because I was fascinated to see how badwad had done it.... but when I time his app I get about 210 milliseconds.....

When I time mine I get 15 milliseconds....

I used the high resolution timer.

I'm not complaining, I'm just really interested in the performance tuning, and if there's maybe a faster one that he re-posted that isn't in the original forum could you publish it for us.

Thanks!

**NoteMe** · Oct 2nd, 2004, 08:35 PM

The problem is that the diffrent apps gives diffrent times on the diffrent machines....like my app that was 4 times slower on Electromans PC, that is supposed to be at least 3 times faster then my machine....

**Ex-FB** · Oct 2nd, 2004, 09:00 PM

Yes, but the speeds should remain proportional to each other roughly?

**NoteMe** · Oct 2nd, 2004, 10:22 PM

Not nesessery...not if a CPU is missing a instruction set an have to emulate something that an other CPU have....then the code that need that instruction set is but ****ed...

**Ex-FB** · Oct 2nd, 2004, 10:50 PM

Mmm - I'm sceptical. No offence to Bodwad, but I don't see any optimisation. A quick check show's that the code he posted is doing something in the order of 1,000,000 calculations, in comparison mine is doing about 5,000..... I'm not saying mine is anything great, but I don't see how this code could be faster. I honestly suspect that this is maybe his first attempt (as I got it out of the entries forum), and I'd just like to see what the winning code was so I can learn from it.

**Ex-FB** · Oct 2nd, 2004, 10:54 PM

Besides, the only isntructions I'm using are +, - and *, I doubt if any of those would be emulated

**Pino** · Oct 3rd, 2004, 04:38 AM

Ok, firstly please remember the FAQ, contests are for fun

secondly bodwads ran Faster than yours on my machine, quite a bit faster!

Bodwad recieved the highest speed mark, I'm not going to go into details about who got what for which aspect, i dont want to start arguments! (And thats what the mods and me have agreed to just display the final mark

)

Your entrie was very good

and thanks for entering

**wossname** · Oct 3rd, 2004, 08:17 AM

Which language won in the speed stakes? VB6 or VB.Net? IE what was the millisecond difference between bodwad's entry and mine?

Still waiting for my prize by the way.

Will it be accessible via the User CP pages?

**Ex-FB** · Oct 3rd, 2004, 08:57 AM

Originally posted by Pino
Ok, firstly please remember the FAQ, contests are for fun

secondly bodwads ran Faster than yours on my machine, quite a bit faster!

Bodwad recieved the highest speed mark, I'm not going to go into details about who got what for which aspect, i dont want to start arguments! (And thats what the mods and me have agreed to just display the final mark )

Your entrie was very good and thanks for entering

Don't get me wrong, I'm just curious to learn about what improvements could be made. That's why I'm so fascinated by the discrepencies, could you check that the version of the code in the forums is his latest version, I'm just asuming that I've picked up an old version of the code, as I cannot see anyway the posted code would run at any great speed at all.

If it is the correct code, out of interest what sort of machine are you running it on, because so far I've ran it on three of my different machines (An Intel P4 2.4gig, an AMD 1800+ and an AMD 600) with all the same results. Either I'm missing something hugely here, or it's the wrong code or there's something very strange happening internally withthe processors (which I would love to find out about - as like most programmers I delve into games programming for fun quite a lot and every ounce of speed that can be eeked out of algorithms is useful). Thanks.

**NoteMe** · Oct 3rd, 2004, 10:17 AM

Well was the test in the IDE or as EXE? Well I tested My code, Ex-FBs code and Bodwads code in the IDE on my machine and I got these results...

Code:

Bodwad:  0.21177 sec
Ex-FB:   0.00580 sec
NoteMe:  0.00567 sec

HEhehe....how did he win....

...ohh....Ex-FB can you test my code against yours on the machine?

**Ex-FB** · Oct 3rd, 2004, 12:02 PM

No problem mate!

In IDE

BodWad: 205 ms
Ex-FB: 11 ms
NoteMe: 8ms

Compiled

BodWad: 61ms
Ex-FB: 11ms
NoteMe: 7ms

Excellent job

though you must have missed electromans rule change ("My first reaction was that the rules already said one per line and I then checked and saw it wasn't in. I then said well if it is allowed then it would loose points for appearance unless it was done very well with proper indenting or something like that. And as you can see after checking with others the change was made.") *cough*

Look, I loved this contest, and I don't actually care about the prize or winning, but I am quite concerned about a game I'm working on right now which is highly optimised for 3d calcs. I don't want to find oiut that it is going to run like a dog on a certain type of processor.

**NoteMe** · Oct 3rd, 2004, 12:52 PM

So my code is the fastest one...

..well nice of me...

....ohh....and if you look at it...it is only one on each line...

...I just used 4 colums...

...so the list didn't wasn't that long...there is NOOOO speed gain...just a visual improvement...

**Ex-FB** · Oct 3rd, 2004, 12:56 PM

There's a massive speed gain.

If you cange it back to 0 columns your back up at 13ms. (12ms compiled)

But well done anyway, a much cleaner bit of code than mine. Nice one.

**NoteMe** · Oct 3rd, 2004, 01:48 PM

Well maybe it is only on my machine you don't get a gain then....I just tested it again....and I got 0.1 ms faster on one column then 10...

**Ex-FB** · Oct 3rd, 2004, 01:51 PM

Did you set the column value to 0? because with 1, you still get columns......

**Ex-FB** · Oct 3rd, 2004, 01:54 PM

Anyway, it doesn't matter, I think I've found the problem with my code, I was doing something silly, and luckily it's easy for me to change in my game code. So it's probably best to just move on.

Congratulations to all involved, I had great fun. Unfortunately I've been waaaaay to busy to get involved with the maze competition (although I think it'd be great fun), but I'm hoping to get some time for the next one.... Good luck to all you maze-tracking folk!

**NoteMe** · Oct 3rd, 2004, 01:55 PM

Yes I did...and even if I didn't I can't see how it should gain speed, it is just the rendering of the list box that changes. You still have to call Add just as many times...

**StevenHickerson** · Oct 3rd, 2004, 02:26 PM

I used 5 columns on my listbox.. it greatly enhances speed when adding to the listbox. Dont ask me why it does but it does. I would think it might have something to do with the redrawing of the listbox in windows but I dont see why its redrawing while invisble (which mine was set to when adding).

*shrug*

**RobDog888** · Oct 3rd, 2004, 03:21 PM

I used a single column so it would put one prime per line. I thought
that was how it was supposed to be according to the rules?

**NoteMe** · Oct 3rd, 2004, 03:32 PM

The rules was trying to make you call Add 1000 times in stead of just a few. So you where not allowed to concatinate strings...

Thread: Prime Numbers Discussion -[Results Included]-

Thread Tools

Display

Prime Numbers Discussion -[Results Included]-

My entry...

Re: My entry...

AHHHHHHH!!!

Posting Permissions