[Wien] performance problem using ifort + Goto's lib

[Jose Mestnik Filho]

Dear Wien users,
This mater seems to be of great interest to the community. So let me be 
more precise:

Mother board: Intel D865 Perl, 800MHz, dual channel memory
memory: 1GB, 400MHz, DDR, two memory boards 512Mb each. This is 
necessary to take the advantage of the dual channel. Expandable up to 4Gb.
Processor: Pentium 4HT, 3.2 GHz, 512Kb cache

The benchmarks for the test_case, for various compilation options were:
ifc6.0 + mkl6.1: 226s (I did not succeed to compile with ifort8.0)
ifc6.0 + ATLAS(1 thread) : 247 s
ifc6.0 + ATLAS (2threads): 362 s (I would expect it to be better, 
because of HT, but, as seen, it is not)
ifc6.0 + goto p4_512-pr0.94: 317s
ifc6.0 + goto p4_512-r0.94: not working

Interesting is that these tests were made with NMATMAX=5000. In the case 
NMATMAX=10000, the timings increase to 234s with ifc6.0 + mkl6.1

Just the "crude" operating system is running. No X11 or whatever else.

Regards,
Jose Mestnik Filho

Peter Blaha wrote:

> P4 (3.2 GHz) is probably not enough to specify a system. Motherboard, memory,
> and specific version of the processor (cache, hypertrading,...) may change
> the performance by these 10-15 %.
> 
> The "228" seconds were reported by
> Lutz Rauscher" <rauscher at qms.cache.waseda.ac.jp>
> and confirmed by
> Jose Mestnik Filho <jmestnik at baitaca.ipen.br>:
> "The computers are pentium 4HT, 3.2 Gh, dual
> channel memory, 1 Gb memory each, expandable until 4Gb. The test_case
> matches exactly with the known benchmarks (226 s)."
> 
> 
> 
>>>P4, 3.2 GHz, dual channel mem.   258 sec    ifc7, mkl6
>>>P4, 3.2 GHz, 400MHz dual ch.mem. 228 sec    ifort8.0, mkl6.1
>>>
>>>Not really a clean comparison (ifc vs ifort as well), but this gain of
>>>30 s is less than the estimated gain of goto over mkl 6.0. If this
>>>conclusion is true (do other users find the same?), then this explains
>>>your above question.
>>>
>>
>>I did the original benchmark on our workstation that yielded the 258 sec
>>result.  This benchmark actually involved the ifc 7.1 compiler and the
>>mkl 6.1 libraries.  I have since applied the latest update to the mkl
>>libraries and recompiled with the ifort 8.0 compiler and I find no change
>>in the benchmark time - with some optimization, I now get a benchmark
>>time of 256 sec, and if you kill absolutely ever process, then you can
>>trim it down to 254 sec.  Compiling with the Goto blas routines also
>>didn't seem to make much of a difference (on the order of seconds).
>>I think this result is consistent with benchmark time of 258 secs that
>>was quoted earlier in this thread.
> 
> 
>                                       P.Blaha
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Peter BLAHA, Inst.f. Materials Chemistry, TU Vienna, A-1060 Vienna
> Phone: +43-1-58801-15671             FAX: +43-1-58801-15698
> Email: blaha at theochem.tuwien.ac.at    WWW: http://info.tuwien.ac.at/theochem/
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Wien mailing list
> Wien at zeus.theochem.tuwien.ac.at
> http://zeus.theochem.tuwien.ac.at/mailman/listinfo/wien
> 
> 

-- 
----------------------------------------------
Jose Mestnik-Filho <jmestnik at net.ipen.br>
Instituto de Pesquisas Energeticas e Nucleares
Research Reactor Center - CRPq
Po.Box. 11049
05422-970 Sao Paulo SP Brasil
----------------------------------------------