Hi Andreas, Thanks. Configuration on Stampede seems to be a little tricky due to their choice of MPI and operating system - at present missing MPSS. Some revised information is here:
https://software.intel.com/en-us/articles/using-the-intel-sdk-for-opencl-applications-xe-2013 https://software.intel.com/en-us/blogs/2015/04/28/working-with-intel-code-builder-for-opencl-api-on-systems-equipped-with-intel-xeon Jianbin Fang (http://www.pds.ewi.tudelft.nl/fang/publications/) seems to get reasonable performance for some Kernels with straght opencL, though setup on Xeon Phi is unclear and am hoping to find out more. Regards, Benson On 7/30/15 6:57 PM, Andreas Kloeckner wrote: > Hi Benson, > > Benson Muite <benson_mu...@yahoo.com> writes: >> Has anyone tried OpenCL on Xeon Phi systems (eg. Stampede)? If so, how >> did you get it to work, in particular what runtime libraries did you use? > I have tried using PyOpenCL on the Xeon phi, and overall I would rate the > experience 2/10. :-) I should preface this by saying that I did this bit of > experimentation in about 2012, so it is not impossible that the situation may > have improved, even considerably. First, when I tried this, TACC did not > support OpenCL as one of the programming models for their Xeon phi cards. That > was easy enough to work around, I installed an ICD loader (the AMD one > actually, because that one can load ICDs from a user-specified path rather > than > the system wide one) as well as Intel's ICD from their webpage in my home > directory. > > Once that was done, I was able to see that Intel has (seemingly) not put > very much effort into their OpenCL implementation for the phi. In > particular, getting performance out of the card for even simple > axpy-like streaming kernels was a real pain. While the card advertises > something like 300 GB per second of memory bandwidth, I was only able to > get maybe 100, and that was after extensive mucking about with unrolling > and vectorizing the kernel. This essentially made me give up on Intel's > phi hardware for the time being. I seriously hope that the next > iteration isn't quite as desperately bad, and/or that Intel makes (or > has made) a much needed investment in their software infrastructure. > > If you do end up trying, I and I imagine many other people on the list would > love to hear what you find. > > Andreas _______________________________________________ PyOpenCL mailing list PyOpenCL@tiker.net http://lists.tiker.net/listinfo/pyopencl
