Oh, I thought you meant that GMP unaltered, from the GMP website built with MSVC.
So why is 4.2.4 unpatched, as fast as MPIR 0.9.0 which is not unpatched (it contains the equivalent of Pierrick Gaudry's patches)? Bill. 2009/3/1 William Stein <wst...@gmail.com>: > > On Sun, Mar 1, 2009 at 8:35 AM, Bill Hart <goodwillh...@googlemail.com> wrote: >> >> GMP 4.2.4 builds with MSVC?? > > Yes. We ship project files for MSVC, and it's very easy to use them, > even in a scripted install. Even I've built it with MSVC (for > windows.sagemath.org). Given that you use Windows a lot, you should > try it out :-) > >> We will certainly have the same naming convention between the linux >> and windows builds in mpir-1.0.0. The binaries will be called mpir*. >> Probably we will introduce a little script to set up links or rename >> them for people who just want to plug mpir in instead of gmp and don't >> care about overwriting their existing gmp binaries. > > How do you setup links like that on Windows? Somehow symlink support in > windows is a bit different. > >> >> Bill. >> >> 2009/3/1 Jeff Gilchrist <jeff.gilchr...@gmail.com>: >>> >>> On Sat, Feb 28, 2009 at 12:54 PM, <ja...@njkfrudils.plus.com> wrote: >>> >>>> This could make a nice "real world" benchmark for MPIR , where we have >>>> cache >>>> misses and branch mispredictions. The current mpirbench and speed don't >>>> have >>>> these features. For example if we pipeline the entire mul_basecase to >>>> increase the speed , it turns out to be 1.5x larger in the code cache. Now >>>> speed and mpirbench would probably not show any indication of this, whereas >>>> in the real world it may be a slowdown. >>> >>> Sounds like a good idea to me. I finally got around to doing some >>> tests with MPIR 0.9 on Windows, both with cygwin and MSVC so I will >>> post my results. It seems that what I really want to see for Windows >>> is the MPIR 1.0 release with all of Brian's additions since the >>> current version is essentially the same speed as GMP. >>> >>> Benchmark: >>> time echo >>> "1606274791359742683462193665835026393961358862962351944720191458360082027218282749671391672280676891140068379759963605046949616963145972154002637700442143987397361301827559875507425065995179598763956235845311986100972998806344397600124996519181" >>> | ./ecm -sigma 2956027510 11e6 >>> >>> Results: >>> AMD Opteron 248 @ 2.2GHz (Linux 64bit) >>> MPIR 0.9 (gcc 3.4.6) = 2m32.406s >>> GMP 4.2.4 (gcc 3.4.6) = 3m20.908s >>> >>> Intel Xeon E5405 @ 2.00GHz (Linux 64bit) >>> MPIR 0.9 (gcc 4.1.2) = 3m45.447s >>> GMP 4.2.4 (gcc 4.1.2) = 4m40.356s >>> >>> Intel Core2 Q9550 @ 3.4GHz (Vista 64bit) >>> GMP 4.2.4 (MSVC 64bit) = 2m06.904s >>> MPIR 0.9 (MSVC 64bit) = 2m07.032s >>> MPIR 0.9 (cyg gcc 3.4.4) = 5m45.800s >>> GMP 4.2.4 (cyg gcc 3.4.4) = 6m25.568s >>> GMP 4.2.4 (MSVC 32bit) = 6m45.073s >>> MPIR 0.9 (MSVC 32bit) = 6m50.230s >>> >>> One thing I noticed is that building MPIR in Linux you get libgmp.a >>> and gmp.h files out. With Windows however, MSVC is setup to create >>> mpir.lib and mpir.h which isn't consistent and I had to rename those >>> files to get them to work with GMP-ECM or any other application that >>> uses GMP. So whatever is decided is it possible to have both use the >>> same naming convention? >>> >>> Regards, >>> Jeff. >>> >>> > >>> >> >> > >> > > > > -- > William Stein > Associate Professor of Mathematics > University of Washington > http://wstein.org > > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "mpir-devel" group. To post to this group, send email to mpir-devel@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to mpir-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/mpir-devel?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
