I'm a former user of Zmud, now using Mushclient, and I've noticed something, that I'm wondering if it is just my own perception or if it is fact. Does Zmud's triggers respond faster than Mushclient? It seems that the same trigger with the same response will respond faster on Zmud than Mushclient. Can anyone varify this?
A Question Concerning Speed
Posted by Biker_Turtle on Mon 06 Dec 2004 02:25 AM — 3 posts, 15,672 views.
I'm the author of MUSHclient, so perhaps I am biased :) however speed has always been important to me.
A while ago I did some benchmarks to compare MUSHclient to various other clients, see:
At the time, MUSHclient was easily faster than all the other clients, including about 8 times as fast as zMUD.
Now this benchmark is somewhat out of date, and all client authors would be improving their products.
So let me put it this way. I tested MUSHclient a moment ago using the latest released version (3.56), and ran it displaying the output of the file mentioned in that benchmark (high.txt) with 5 regular expression triggers set up, to match "a", "b", "c", "d", "e" and "f".
This file has 5378 lines in it, and because those letters appear in most lines, MUSHclient registers 4176 trigger matches when processing it. According to its internal timers (which you can see from the Configuration -> Info screen) matching those 4176 triggers takes 0.013 seconds on my PC.
Using my stopwatch the whole 5378 lines scroll past in under a second, with the appropriate letters (a, b, c, d, e, f) being coloured as instructed by the triggers I set up.
Now, to match four thousand triggers in around a hundredth of a second seems pretty fast to me, you would need a hundred thousand triggers (which I doubt you have) to get a significant slowdown. Based on the figures from my earlier benchmarks, and another test I did today, MUSHclient is still displaying that text faster than zMUD.
A while ago I did some benchmarks to compare MUSHclient to various other clients, see:
http://www.gammon.com.au/mushclient/benchmarks_old.htm
At the time, MUSHclient was easily faster than all the other clients, including about 8 times as fast as zMUD.
Now this benchmark is somewhat out of date, and all client authors would be improving their products.
So let me put it this way. I tested MUSHclient a moment ago using the latest released version (3.56), and ran it displaying the output of the file mentioned in that benchmark (high.txt) with 5 regular expression triggers set up, to match "a", "b", "c", "d", "e" and "f".
This file has 5378 lines in it, and because those letters appear in most lines, MUSHclient registers 4176 trigger matches when processing it. According to its internal timers (which you can see from the Configuration -> Info screen) matching those 4176 triggers takes 0.013 seconds on my PC.
Using my stopwatch the whole 5378 lines scroll past in under a second, with the appropriate letters (a, b, c, d, e, f) being coloured as instructed by the triggers I set up.
Now, to match four thousand triggers in around a hundredth of a second seems pretty fast to me, you would need a hundred thousand triggers (which I doubt you have) to get a significant slowdown. Based on the figures from my earlier benchmarks, and another test I did today, MUSHclient is still displaying that text faster than zMUD.
Thank you.