LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
  #12   Report Post  
Posted to microsoft.public.excel.worksheet.functions
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,572
Default Replace SUMIF with SUMPRODUCT

I know exactly what you're talking about.

That database I referred to, where I cut back the open and recalc times, was
a 40,000 row X 32 field sheet.

That's over one and a quarter million formulas.
You can picture what that was like at the start when there were double
Vlookups.

Being familiar with my experience using that old, large database sheet, and
plugging in your numbers, I figure that there's a 17% difference, that's 7½
minutes - over a 44 + minute open, where my original, *bad* open time was an
*actual* 24-25 minutes.

Even if your times are flawed (evenly flawed), they *still* show that 17%
*advantage*.

Interesting!
--
Regards,

RD

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Please keep all correspondence within the NewsGroup, so all may benefit !
---------------------------------------------------------------------------


"T. Valko" wrote in message
...
Are we talking minutes, seconds, milliseconds ... ?


Milliseconds

Every millisecond adds up!

Note that those tests are on 1 single formula. If there were 100's or even
1000's of similar formulas the difference could be significant. Granted,
most files aren't big enough or so complex that maximum efficiency needs

to
be a consideration *but* if you get into the habit of being as efficient

as
possible to the best of ones ability all the time, then you're ahead of

the
curve.

--
Biff
Microsoft Excel MVP


"Ragdyer" wrote in message
...
So Biff, what time fragments do those numbers represent?

Are we talking minutes, seconds, milliseconds ... ?

What would those results equate to the OP's scenario?

I have personally saved almost 50% in opening and recalc times (25 down

to
14) for large WBs being used as databases simply by changing double
lookups
and Vlookups (w/error traps) to Index and Match formulas, so this is

*not*
a
confrontational question.
Are there really *appreciable* savings between the 2 versions?
--
Regards,

RD


--------------------------------------------------------------------------

-
Please keep all correspondence within the NewsGroup, so all may benefit

!

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

-
"T. Valko" wrote in message
...
calculation times screencap:

http://img267.imageshack.us/img267/6...ltimes1rq2.jpg

The multiplication version is slightly faster when the number of
variables
is small. As the number of variables increases the calc time also

increases
"signifcantly".

The --(ISNUMBER(MATCH(...)) version is faster in 2 out of 3 tests. Also

note
that the number of variables seems to not slow this version down
(although
the number of variables is small).

Calc times measured using Charles Williams RangeTimer method.

--
Biff
Microsoft Excel MVP


"Bernard Liengme" wrote in message
...
Thanks for this, We life and learn
cheers
--
Bernard V Liengme
Microsoft Excel MVP
www.stfx.ca/people/bliengme
remove caps from email

"RagDyer" wrote in message
...
If you've seen my posts over the years, you might have noticed my
*distaste* for the unary form of Sumproduct.

Besides the fact that it *can't* be used on different sized ranges
(column vs. row), and the fact that it allows text numbers to be
by-passed without any notice, it *also* doesn't work in this

scenario.

Just revise your test formula from unary to asterisk, which is the
form
my suggested formula used.

=SUMPRODUCT((A1:A9={"A","B"})*B1:B9)

No problem with this ... is there?
--
Regards,

RD



------------------------------------------------------------------------

-
--
Please keep all correspondence within the NewsGroup, so all may
benefit

!


------------------------------------------------------------------------

-
--
"Bernard Liengme" wrote in message
...
That will earn a #VALUE! error
Let A1:A9 have letters a, b or c in each cell
Let B1:B9 have numbers
Then your method becomes =SUMPRODUCT(--(A1:A9={"A","B"}),B1:B9)
But the part (A1:A9={"A","B"}) generates an 18 element array of

TRUE
and
FALSE values. But since B1:B9 is a nine element array, we have a
mismatch.

T Valko's method with ISNUMBER(MATCH overcomes the problem and let
one
use {"A","B"}

best wishes from Canada
--
Bernard V Liengme
Microsoft Excel MVP
www.stfx.ca/people/bliengme
remove caps from email

"RagDyer" wrote in message
...
Little shorter:


=SUMPRODUCT(('M:\WORKBOOK1\[SHEET1]SHEET1'!$A$7:$A$70={"INT","IT","MA"})
*'M:\WORKBOOK1\[SHEET1]SHEET1'!$AK$7:$AK$70)

--
HTH,

RD



----------------------------------------------------------------------

-
----
Please keep all correspondence within the NewsGroup, so all may

benefit
!


----------------------------------------------------------------------

-
----
"torooo" wrote in message


...
Thanks for your assistance, the formula works (without the extra
parenthesis).

Best














 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
sumproduct? sumif(sumproduct)? David Excel Worksheet Functions 3 July 13th 07 07:06 PM
HELP !!! SUMIF or SUMPRODUCT Soultek Excel Discussion (Misc queries) 3 March 21st 07 03:30 PM
SumIf or SumProduct [email protected] Excel Worksheet Functions 8 February 13th 07 06:40 PM
SUMIF,SUMPRODUCT litngldy New Users to Excel 2 September 12th 06 08:48 AM
sumif or sumproduct? ronnomad Excel Worksheet Functions 5 August 7th 06 10:13 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 06:55 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2025 ExcelBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about Microsoft Excel"