Karl Rupp <r...@iue.tuwien.ac.at> writes: >> Do you have any experience with nsparse? >> >> https://github.com/EBD-CREST/nsparse >> >> I've seen claims that it is much faster than cuSPARSE for sparse >> matrix-matrix products. > > I haven't tried nsparse, no. > > But since the performance comes from a hardware feature (cache), I would > be surprised if there is a big performance leap over ViennaCL. (There's > certainly some potential for some tweaking of ViennaCL's kernels; but > note that even ViennaCL is much faster than cuSPARSE's spGEMM on average). > > With the libaxb-wrapper we can just add nsparse as an operations backend > and then easily try it out and compare against the other packages. In > the end it doesn't matter which package provides the best performance; > we just want to leverage it :-)
Indeed. It'll be interesting to compare whenever someone has time to add the interface. I guess we could compare with a Matrix Market file any time (using the driver distributed with nsparse).