gus at ldeo.columbia.edu
Sun May 3 14:16:31 EDT 2009
Thank you Chris, Bill, Greg, and Joe.
Bill Broadley wrote:
> Chris Samuel wrote:
>> In the sense that they have no desire to support
>> competitors hardware, yes. Not really surprising,
> Sure, they could be nice enough to have a flag to disable the check for
> non-intel cpus. That way intel could avoid the cost of testing/certification
> of AMD cpus and folks that want to take the risk could. There is a binary
> floating around that patches binaries to avoid the check.
This is gone:
> Improvements were
> on the order of 0-15% I believe, nobody reported wrong answers as a result.
The (familiar?) Slashdot/2005 discussion:
another on Ubuntu/2008:
>> if AMD made compilers I doubt they'd try and do
>> Intel specific optimisations either..
> Well the issue wasn't intel not doing AMD specific optimizations, it was intel
> enabling optimizations that would benefit both CPUs, only when running on intel.
Currently -xW (SSE,SSE2) seems to be the highest architecture-dependent
optimization the Intel compiler allows for Opterons.
Shanghai, Barcelona, and others have more than SSE2, right?
"-xW" is also what AMD recommends when using Intel compilers:
Compiler Usage Guidelines, p.25:
"3.3.2 Generic Performance Switches
The switches -xW -ipo -O3 -static are generally recommended."
Beowulf mailing list, Beowulf at beowulf.org sponsored by Penguin Computing
To change your subscription (digest mode or unsubscribe) visit http://www.beowulf.org/mailman/listinfo/beowulf
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.
More information about the Beowulf