Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

2.6.0 is significantly faster than 2.5.0 #5832

Closed
scottchiefbaker opened this issue Feb 28, 2019 · 3 comments
Closed

2.6.0 is significantly faster than 2.5.0 #5832

scottchiefbaker opened this issue Feb 28, 2019 · 3 comments

Comments

@scottchiefbaker
Copy link

I don't have an issue, I just wanted to say Good Job (TM) to the team working on this firmware!

I'm using this SHA256 script to benchmark my ESP8226. Comparing the results between 2.5.0 and 2.6.0-dev I'm seeing significant speed improvements:

x 2.50 2.6.0-dev Percent Improvement
CPU @ 80Mh ~9520 iterations ~11010 iterations 15.6%
CPU @ 160Mh ~17270 iterations ~22110 iterations 28.0%

The exact same code, running on the exact same hardware is showing a 15% improvement. When you bump the CPU up to 160Mhz the improvements are even more impressive! Excellent job.

Since this really isn't an issue I'll leave it open for a couple of days so people can see it and then I'll close it.

@cziter15
Copy link
Contributor

cziter15 commented Feb 28, 2019

Yes, that is caused by ESP SDK revert from 3.0.0-dev to 2.2.1 as I remember.

Prerelease version of 3.0.0 was buggy, but the devs are unable to upgrade to stable 3.0.0 quickly, because there are some hacks in Arduino, that are not working on latest NONOS sdk.

@TD-er
Copy link
Contributor

TD-er commented Feb 28, 2019

Indeed, the default is now SDK2.2.1 again.
Core 2.5.0 is using SDK 3.0.0-dev

See also #5513 (comment)

@devyte
Copy link
Collaborator

devyte commented Mar 1, 2019

Having our effort appreciated is rare and always encouraging, but previous comments are correct: it's the SDK that was reverted, and not really our efforts. Please see pinned issue #5784.
Closing.

@devyte devyte closed this as completed Mar 1, 2019
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants