Am I incorrect in my normal usage of "x" when conveying relative performance? Wi... | Hacker News

Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit

		brwnll on March 3, 2015 \| parent \| context \| favorite \| on: Node.js module performance Am I incorrect in my normal usage of "x" when conveying relative performance? With 120.8498 vs 120.4320 being conveyed as "1.00 x slower". Is this the correct terminology for results that are on par with each other? Really, these results are (relatively) unchanged. Shouldn't it be 0.003x slower, with the formula being (Old / New) - 1. From the page: Result Node.js v0.12.0 Called v2, util.yo("man") 100.000.000.000 times in 120.849870219 sec (1.00 x slower than v3) Called v3, util.yo("man") 100.000.000.000 times in 120.432087601 sec

sorenso on March 3, 2015 [–]

Thanks for your comment. I agree that the semantic of this can be misinterpreted.

It should have said "1.00 x the speed of v3". I'll change the text in my next run of this.

I'm currently working on a new benchmark test of promises and callbacks. All in the name of performance :)

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact