Optimized Approximative pow() in C / C++

Mostly thanks to this reddit discussion, I have updated my pow() approximation for C / C++. I have now two different versions:


This new code uses the union trick, instead of the weird casting trick I’ve used before. This means that -fno-strict-aliasing is no more required any more when compiling, and it is also a bit faster because one less temporary variables is needed. When you have a little endian machine, you have to exchange u.x[0] and u.x[1]. On my PC, this version is 4.2 times faster than the much more precise pow().

Besides that, I also have now a slower approximation that has much less error when the exponent is larger than 1. It makes use exponentiation by squaring, which is exact for the integer part of the exponent, and uses only the exponent’s fraction for the approximation:

This code is 3.3 times faster than pow(). Writing a microbenchmark is not easy, so I have posted mine here. Here is also a Java version of the more accurate pow approximation.

Any ideas how this could be improved? Please post them!

10 Comments on "Optimized Approximative pow() in C / C++"

Notify of
avatar

trackback

[…] I was hunting for a faster one. There are quite some interesting variations around in the net, like one for doubles which is quite some impressive a bit-hackery, reminds me of Quake’s sqrt(). The […]

Pieter
Guest
Pieter
4 years 3 months ago

The new approximation does not work with negative exponents because the loop will never end. Is the first approximation valid for negative exponents?

inlineWillIncreaseit
Guest
inlineWillIncreaseit
2 years 1 month ago

I have seen some people use the old fashion Taylor aproximations in they calculus but there are some better algorithms.
Don’t they use some asm and some tables for that

trackback
1 year 9 months ago

[…] ?????? double? ????? ??? ?? ??? Optimized Approximative pow() in C / C++ | Martin Ankerl? fastPow ??? ???? ???, ??? […]

Steve
Guest
Steve
1 year 4 months ago

You could modify the function like this so it can handle negative exponents:

inline double CompOgdenRobust::fastPrecisePow(double a, double b)
{
if (b >= 1;
}

return r * u.d;
}

Steve
Guest
Steve
1 year 4 months ago

apologies I can’t seem to post the code in the comments without it messing up

Shafik Yaghmour
Guest
1 year 2 months ago

I referenced your article in my Stackoverflow answer here: http://stackoverflow.com/a/16782797/1708801

As I noted there, type punning through a union is formally undefined behavior in C++. Although many compilers support it with well defined behavior, this is not universal as we can see from this article: http://blog.regehr.org/archives/959

trackback

[…] The code below is updated with using union, you do not need -fno-strict-aliasing any more for compiling. Also, here is a more precise version of the approximation. […]

passe
Guest
passe
3 months 19 days ago

Great implementation … I would like to use it on a microcontroller, but instead of doubles i need floats, do you have any suggestions of how your function needs to be adapted to calculate pow with floats and 32b (or 16b) integers?
Regards …

wpDiscuz