fortran compiler
Many of your questions may have already been answered in earlier discussions or in the FAQ. The search results page will indicate current discussions as well as past list serves, articles, and papers.
John Casu casuj at valinux.comFri Oct 27 20:11:13 PDT 2000
- Previous message: fortran compiler
- Next message: night-time auto-reboot?
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
> On Fri, 27 Oct 2000, Robert G. Brown wrote:
> >
..snip..
> The same should work with Absoft.
> It would be a shame to build the Fortran interface with g77:
> You gain a factor of 4 or more in speed with ATLAS and you loose a factor
> 2-4 with g77 ...
>
I stand corrected wrt the c compilers:
For PGCC (Portland compiler) I get the following extracted numbers from SUMMARY.LOG
Apparent peak=299.28MFLOPS
Apparent peak=327.75MFLOPS
This gave performance of 157.20MFLOPS (52.53% of apparent peak)
This gave performance of 186.68MFLOPS (56.96% of apparent peak)
This gave performance of 161.51MFLOPS (53.97% of apparent peak)
This gave performance of 190.77MFLOPS (58.21% of apparent peak)
For PGCC/EGCS I get:
Apparent peak=499.79MFLOPS
Apparent peak=499.79MFLOPS
This gave performance of 355.84MFLOPS (71.20% of apparent peak)
This gave performance of 416.01MFLOPS (83.24% of apparent peak)
This gave performance of 379.84MFLOPS (76.00% of apparent peak)
This gave performance of 411.84MFLOPS (82.40% of apparent peak)
Both runs were on the same 500MHz PIII, using Atlas3.0 beta with no patches.
For Portland I compiled with -O3.
For PGCC/EGCS I used the default config flags which are :
-funroll_all_loops -O3 -fomit-frame-pointers
- Previous message: fortran compiler
- Next message: night-time auto-reboot?
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the Beowulf mailing list
