On 2010-6-3 14:59 , vincent habchi wrote: > Le 2 juin 2010 à 23:13, Stephen Langer a écrit : > >> I was wondering why anything depends on atlas at all. Is atlas noticeably >> better than the lapack and blas routines in the Accelerate framework? I >> couldn't find any comparisons on-line. > > I am unsure. But, as long as Apple does not state that its Blas and Lapack > libraries are OpenCL based, in which case they may be hundred times quicker > that CPU-thread-based Atlas, I am lead to believe that Atlas compiled with > the latest gcc45 should be more efficient than Apple blas or lapack, most > probably generated with gcc42 (the last GPL2 version) and backward-compatible > with MacOS 10.4 or 10.5; Maybe they can get better efficiency with > Clang/LLVM. However, I faintly remember comparing the Atlas built-in tests, > and there was a clear gap between gcc43 and gcc44. > > It should not be very difficult to build up a test, like finding the > eigenvalues of a random but symmetric definite positive matrix of great size > (say : 50,000 x 50,000 or more) in Xcode, and link either with the built-in > framework or our Atlas. > > Cheers > Vincent > > PS : Does Apple provide scipy in its Python distribution?
No, 'import scipy' fails, which agrees with this list: <http://opensource.apple.com/source/python_modules/python_modules-21/> - Josh _______________________________________________ macports-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/macports-users
