[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
## [Octave-bug-tracker] [bug #58926] Octave gives wrong results with intel-

**From**: |
anonymous |

**Subject**: |
[Octave-bug-tracker] [bug #58926] Octave gives wrong results with intel-mkl when diagonalizing large matrices |

**Date**: |
Thu, 13 Aug 2020 11:33:59 -0400 (EDT) |

**User-agent**: |
Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:79.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/79.0 |

Follow-up Comment #31, bug #58926 (project octave):
@Dmitri: Completely agree. I'm on Ryzen too and my OpenBLAS results were much
faster than OP's posted benchmarks. (Yours are slightly faster being 16
threads unlike my 12). That's what prompted my question to OP on whether he
was using precompiled OpenBLAS with untuned flags. If so, using a properly
built OpenBLAS would be very competitive with MKL, as far as Octave goes
anyway.
octave:7> format long g
octave:8> format compact
octave:9> clear all; n = 500; C = sin((1:n)' + (1:n).^2); for i = 100:-1:1,
tic; val(i) = max(eig(C)); t(i) = toc; end; clear i; assert(range(val)==0);
assert(all(abs(val - 16.914886497930) <= 1e-12)); [min(t), mean(t), median(t),
max(t), range(t), std(t)]
ans =
Columns 1 through 4:
0.1320030689239502 0.133814971446991 0.133613109588623
0.1365499496459961
Columns 5 and 6:
0.004546880722045898 0.0008096358540892868
_______________________________________________________
Reply to this item at:
<https://savannah.gnu.org/bugs/?58926>
_______________________________________________
Message sent via Savannah
https://savannah.gnu.org/

**[Octave-bug-tracker] [bug #58926] Octave gives wrong results with intel-mkl when diagonalizing large matrices**, *(continued)*
**[Octave-bug-tracker] [bug #58926] Octave gives wrong results with intel-mkl when diagonalizing large matrices**, *John W. Eaton*, `2020/08/11`
**[Octave-bug-tracker] [bug #58926] Octave gives wrong results with intel-mkl when diagonalizing large matrices**, *John W. Eaton*, `2020/08/11`
**[Octave-bug-tracker] [bug #58926] Octave gives wrong results with intel-mkl when diagonalizing large matrices**, *anonymous*, `2020/08/11`
**[Octave-bug-tracker] [bug #58926] Octave gives wrong results with intel-mkl when diagonalizing large matrices**, *Archisman Panigrahi*, `2020/08/12`
**[Octave-bug-tracker] [bug #58926] Octave gives wrong results with intel-mkl when diagonalizing large matrices**, *anonymous*, `2020/08/12`
**[Octave-bug-tracker] [bug #58926] Octave gives wrong results with intel-mkl when diagonalizing large matrices**, *Archisman Panigrahi*, `2020/08/12`
**[Octave-bug-tracker] [bug #58926] Octave gives wrong results with intel-mkl when diagonalizing large matrices**, *Archisman Panigrahi*, `2020/08/12`
**[Octave-bug-tracker] [bug #58926] Octave gives wrong results with intel-mkl when diagonalizing large matrices**, *anonymous*, `2020/08/12`
**[Octave-bug-tracker] [bug #58926] Octave gives wrong results with intel-mkl when diagonalizing large matrices**, *anonymous*, `2020/08/13`
**[Octave-bug-tracker] [bug #58926] Octave gives wrong results with intel-mkl when diagonalizing large matrices**, *Dmitri A. Sergatskov*, `2020/08/13`
**[Octave-bug-tracker] [bug #58926] Octave gives wrong results with intel-mkl when diagonalizing large matrices**,
*anonymous* **<=**
**[Octave-bug-tracker] [bug #58926] Octave gives wrong results with intel-mkl when diagonalizing large matrices**, *Archisman Panigrahi*, `2020/08/13`
**[Octave-bug-tracker] [bug #58926] Octave gives wrong results with intel-mkl when diagonalizing large matrices**, *anonymous*, `2020/08/13`