A Tuesday 26 May 2009 15:14:39 Andrew Friedley escrigué:
David Cournapeau wrote:
Francesc Alted wrote:
Well, it is Andrew who should demonstrate that his measurement is
correct, but in principle, 4 cycles/item *should* be feasible when using
8 cores in parallel.
But the 100x speed
Francesc Alted wrote:
A Tuesday 26 May 2009 15:14:39 Andrew Friedley escrigué:
David Cournapeau wrote:
Francesc Alted wrote:
Well, it is Andrew who should demonstrate that his measurement is
correct, but in principle, 4 cycles/item *should* be feasible when using
8 cores in
Andrew Friedley wrote:
David Cournapeau wrote:
Francesc Alted wrote:
No, that seems good enough. But maybe you can present results in
cycles/item.
This is a relatively common unit and has the advantage that it does not
depend
on the frequency of your cores.
Sure,
A Tuesday 26 May 2009 03:11:56 David Cournapeau escrigué:
Charles R Harris wrote:
On Mon, May 25, 2009 at 4:59 AM, Andrew Friedley afrie...@indiana.edu
mailto:afrie...@indiana.edu wrote:
For some reason the list seems to occasionally drop my messages...
Francesc Alted wrote:
Francesc Alted wrote:
Well, it is Andrew who should demonstrate that his measurement is correct,
but
in principle, 4 cycles/item *should* be feasible when using 8 cores in
parallel.
But the 100x speed increase is for one core only unless I misread the
table. And I should have mentioned
David Cournapeau wrote:
Francesc Alted wrote:
Well, it is Andrew who should demonstrate that his measurement is correct,
but
in principle, 4 cycles/item *should* be feasible when using 8 cores in
parallel.
But the 100x speed increase is for one core only unless I misread the
table. And
For some reason the list seems to occasionally drop my messages...
Francesc Alted wrote:
A Friday 22 May 2009 13:52:46 Andrew Friedley escrigué:
I'm the student doing the project. I have a blog here, which contains
some initial performance numbers for a couple test ufuncs I did:
On Mon, May 25, 2009 at 4:59 AM, Andrew Friedley afrie...@indiana.eduwrote:
For some reason the list seems to occasionally drop my messages...
Francesc Alted wrote:
A Friday 22 May 2009 13:52:46 Andrew Friedley escrigué:
I'm the student doing the project. I have a blog here, which
A Monday 25 May 2009 12:59:31 Andrew Friedley escrigué:
For some reason the list seems to occasionally drop my messages...
Francesc Alted wrote:
A Friday 22 May 2009 13:52:46 Andrew Friedley escrigué:
I'm the student doing the project. I have a blog here, which contains
some initial
Charles R Harris wrote:
On Mon, May 25, 2009 at 4:59 AM, Andrew Friedley afrie...@indiana.edu
mailto:afrie...@indiana.edu wrote:
For some reason the list seems to occasionally drop my messages...
Francesc Alted wrote:
A Friday 22 May 2009 13:52:46 Andrew Friedley escrigué:
dmitrey schrieb:
hi all,
has anyone already tried to compare using an ordinary numpy ufunc vs
that one from corepy, first of all I mean the project
http://socghop.appspot.com/student_project/show/google/gsoc2009/python/t124024628235
It would be interesting to know what is speedup for (eg)
A Friday 22 May 2009 11:42:56 Gregor Thalhammer escrigué:
dmitrey schrieb:
hi all,
has anyone already tried to compare using an ordinary numpy ufunc vs
that one from corepy, first of all I mean the project
http://socghop.appspot.com/student_project/show/google/gsoc2009/python/t1
(sending again)
Hi,
I'm the student doing the project. I have a blog here, which contains
some initial performance numbers for a couple test ufuncs I did:
http://numcorepy.blogspot.com
It's really too early yet to give definitive results though; GSoC
officially starts in two days :) What
Francesc Alted wrote:
A Friday 22 May 2009 11:42:56 Gregor Thalhammer escrigué:
dmitrey schrieb:
3) Improving performance by using multi cores is much more difficult.
Only for sufficiently large (1e5) arrays a significant speedup is
possible. Where a speed gain is possible, the MKL uses
A Friday 22 May 2009 13:59:17 Andrew Friedley escrigué:
Using multiple cores is pretty easy for element-wise ufuncs; no
communication needs to occur and the work partitioning is trivial. And
actually I've found with some initial testing that multiple cores does
still help when you are memory
A Friday 22 May 2009 13:52:46 Andrew Friedley escrigué:
(sending again)
Hi,
I'm the student doing the project. I have a blog here, which contains
some initial performance numbers for a couple test ufuncs I did:
http://numcorepy.blogspot.com
It's really too early yet to give definitive
hi all,
has anyone already tried to compare using an ordinary numpy ufunc vs
that one from corepy, first of all I mean the project
http://socghop.appspot.com/student_project/show/google/gsoc2009/python/t124024628235
It would be interesting to know what is speedup for (eg) vec ** 0.5 or
(if it's
17 matches
Mail list logo
