A New High-Order and Efficient Family of Iterative Techniques for Nonlinear Models

Table 6

CPU time taken by different methods on examples 1–5.

Methods	Ex. 1	Ex. 2	Ex. 3	Ex. 4	Ex. 5	Total time	Average time
	0.141097	1.658164	636.148568	49.370628	1418.257989	2105.576446	421.1152892
	0.109075	1.031724	323.672644	24.845433	973.952124	1323.611	264.7222
	0.586411	1.590115	634.605760	49.738892	1492.151852	2178.67303	435.734606
	0.646454	2.371663	611.849108	50.585468	2207.404740	2872.857433	574.571866
	1.262873	1.570112	376.072834	148.621206	1018.385809	1545.912834	309.1825668
	0.260183	0.609427	251.443292	25.600944	779.653091	1057.566937	211.5133874
	0.283189	0.764537	364.446516	25.026559	723.418750	1113.939551	222.7879102

Our scheme has the lowest average CPU time. Since, has convergence order fourth and others have sixth. Then, it is quite obvious that has lower convergence behavior as compared to other mentioned methods in terms of residual error, asymptotic error constant, etc. However, it is better than the others in regard of CPU timing. On the other hand, the second lowest average CPU time belongs to our sixth-order convergent scheme and also illustrates better convergence performance as compared to other mentioned methods.