3 ms·
"the library"? Igraph and graph tool might have something to retort to that. Up until this update, they were far far faster too (and still likely are if you ig
by Der_Einzige 4y ago
"the library"?
Igraph and graph tool might have something to retort to that. Up until this update, they were far far faster too (and still likely are if you ignore the ability in this update to specify different backends)
- lmeyerov 4y agoYep we use cuGraph a ton, and stick to the CPU stuff for < 100k graphs, esp for their more niche algs. Exciting days!
- anigbrowl 4y agoYes. I noted that it's not the most performant, indeed it's famous for being slow. But it's so popular, has such extensive code coverage, and such a simple API that it's gained default status, not unlike how Python is the default language for data science despite its limitations.
- NibLer 4y ago[dead]
- nerdponx 4y agoI always used IGraph because there are both R and Python versions, and I learned R first. I never had any complaints about it for the baby-scale problems I used it for, so I never bothered to try NetworkX.