Very interesting approach. I should probably have specified that the somewhat naive assembly in `02-the-same-speed-as-c/loop-5.x64.s` is the fastest version I have.
On my machine I'm getting 0.244s for `loop-5.x64.s` and 0.422s for your implementation above.
I'm not sure why exactly we're seeing this discrepancy, and for what it's worth your implementation looks faster to me. I guess this is why you need to always benchmark on the hardware you're going to be running the code on...
On my machine I'm getting 0.244s for `loop-5.x64.s` and 0.422s for your implementation above.
I'm not sure why exactly we're seeing this discrepancy, and for what it's worth your implementation looks faster to me. I guess this is why you need to always benchmark on the hardware you're going to be running the code on...