There are lots of times/examples were Bmax is slower than b3d, the mandlebrot one thats floating about for example. (although in that case I beleive that its because of plot being a quad in Bmax rather than B3d).
In the others examples it comes down to if you have declared the globals/locals in the most optimum way for BMax. Its quite possible in BMax to change a varibale from Global to local (or suprisingly the reverse), and it have quite a dramatic effect on speeding up the example.
I seem to be in the Minority in thinking that Bmax isnt in fact faster in general than B3D. I do think that BMax is a better language than B3D, and has such give me (who obviously is the important thing for me), a faster development, but in the majority of Tests Ive seen/run with the SDK, Bmax is slower.
However all these benchmarks dont seem to take dev time into concideration, and if I can say so, generaly are so pointless as to be useless. There was one a coulple of months ago that showed that C++ was oneK times faster than Bmax, until it was pointed out that the C++ pre-compiler was simple missing out the pointless variable alocation in a loop because it was subsquently unused.
I got Bmax over B3d, not because Bmax was faster, but because it had the things I wanted in a langage that B3D didnt, things that I felt I would make my programs in some way more asteticly pleasing. I am not supprised if the Sdk plus Bmax is slower than B3D. And in fact the fisrt thing I did with the SDK was to OOPwrap it, which made it even slower.
After having said all that, and irrelevent of whats been posted, I had a quick go at loading in a terraed map to the SDK, and it wasnt noticably slower than in B3D
To sum, I really cannot see the point in most of this. A lot of us started with KHZ CPUs, and now we all have KilloMegaHrtz, it should nowadys all come down to the ease of the language rather than its speed, as whoever said it above said about Python
In the others examples it comes down to if you have declared the globals/locals in the most optimum way for BMax. Its quite possible in BMax to change a varibale from Global to local (or suprisingly the reverse), and it have quite a dramatic effect on speeding up the example.
I seem to be in the Minority in thinking that Bmax isnt in fact faster in general than B3D. I do think that BMax is a better language than B3D, and has such give me (who obviously is the important thing for me), a faster development, but in the majority of Tests Ive seen/run with the SDK, Bmax is slower.
However all these benchmarks dont seem to take dev time into concideration, and if I can say so, generaly are so pointless as to be useless. There was one a coulple of months ago that showed that C++ was oneK times faster than Bmax, until it was pointed out that the C++ pre-compiler was simple missing out the pointless variable alocation in a loop because it was subsquently unused.
I got Bmax over B3d, not because Bmax was faster, but because it had the things I wanted in a langage that B3D didnt, things that I felt I would make my programs in some way more asteticly pleasing. I am not supprised if the Sdk plus Bmax is slower than B3D. And in fact the fisrt thing I did with the SDK was to OOPwrap it, which made it even slower.
After having said all that, and irrelevent of whats been posted, I had a quick go at loading in a terraed map to the SDK, and it wasnt noticably slower than in B3D
To sum, I really cannot see the point in most of this. A lot of us started with KHZ CPUs, and now we all have KilloMegaHrtz, it should nowadys all come down to the ease of the language rather than its speed, as whoever said it above said about Python