On 19.11.2012 18:42, Dag Sverre Seljebotn wrote: > Even on CPUs that are not directly supported, this is at least better > than reference BLAS. > > (On our AMD CPUs, which are too new to have a separate OpenBLAS > implementation, the implementations for older AMD CPUs still outperform > at least Intel MKL, because MKL does so poorly on these -- although ACML > beats them both by a factor 2. And of course on supported CPUs > (everything Intel and older AMD) OpenBLAS is wonderful.
Indeed. I have a laptop with a quadcore AMD Phenom II, but ACML consistently segfaults when used with MinGW (gcc or gfortran). With another set of compilers (Microsoft C and Absoft Fortran), ACML usually works, but sometimes decides my CPU is not supported, and just terminates the process. I'm not sure NumPy even builds against ACML, e.g. it has a non-standard C interface for BLAS and LAPACK. Also, it wouldn't work with GNU compilers on Windows. Dependency on Intel or PGI run-time DLLs would also make it useless for the binary superpacks. OTOH, OpenBLAS works wonderfully :) Sturla _______________________________________________ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion