CGAL users discussion list

[Andreas Fabri <>]

How does your benchmark program look like???



On 16/10/2013 12:15, mytien wrote:
> So I compared both triangulation templates. While Delaunay_triangulation_3 is
> much faster than Triangulation_3, especially with growing amount of points,
> it is still far from reaching the performance in the manual.
> Also, I ran every test three times and apart from the slow performance in
> general I am worried about the huge differences. For example duration of
> Delaunay_triangulation_3 on 50'000 points varies by 10 seconds...
>
> t3 = CGAL::Triangulation_3<K>
> dt3 = CGAL::Delaunay_triangulation_3<K>
> time in milliseconds
>
> 1000 points
> t3 ~230 - ~350
> dt3 ~250 - ~280
>
> 10'000 points
> t3 ~4300 - ~5100
> dt3 ~2570 - ~5100
>
> 20'000 points
> t3 ~12200 - ~16500
> dt3 ~4760 - ~6000
>
> 50'000 points
> t3 ~53400 - ~65400
> dt3 ~16900 - ~26500
>
>
>
> --
> View this message in context: 
> http://cgal-discuss.949826.n4.nabble.com/Performance-of-Triangulation-3-tp4658201p4658209.html
> Sent from the cgal-discuss mailing list archive at Nabble.com.


--
Andreas Fabri, PhD
Chief Officer, GeometryFactory
Editor, The CGAL Project

phone: +33.492.954.912    skype: andreas.fabri