Ideally you'll have to benchmark the correct code to determine the differences in performance between different architectures.
We have some 'sequential' performance numbers for a sample test case in src/benchmarks/results/performance_cfd_2_10. Also anyone can run this benchmark on the hardware they are evaluating - with the options mentioned in this file [the datafiles are at ftp://ftp.mcs.anl.gov/pub/petsc/matrices] With sparse computations, we generally see that the limiting factor is memory bandwidth. So a core-2-duo desktop could have 21GB/s shared [first generation has lower value?] between 4 procs. If this is correct than I would expect it to provide pretty good performance.. Satish On Wed, 24 Jan 2007, Aron Ahmadia wrote: > Hi Ben, > > These are some really difficult questions to answer quickly. PETSc > performance is dependent on a large variety of factors, from the > architecture of your computer to the layout of your network to how much RAM > you have, most importantly the problem you are trying to solve. > > I have an Intel Core Duo laptop as well as a dual-processor Intel Core 2 Duo > workstation here at Columbia, I'd be happy to benchmark some of your code > for you if it will help you decide on the upgrade. > > Thanks, > ~Aron > > On 1/23/07, Ben Tay <zonexo at gmail.com> wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > > Intel's new processor core 2 duo (c2d) have been getting pretty good > > reviews. How well is PETSc performance on the c2d? > > > > I wonder how much speed improvement will I get if I upgrade from my > > current Athlon XP 2400+ at 2200mhz. Also the speed improvement over my > > school's xeon 3.06ghz server. > > > > Is there any place where I can get or run some benchmark to get a rough > > comparison? > > > > Btw, how important is L1/L2 cache impact on PETSc's performance? e.g. 2Mb > > vs 4 Mb L2 cache different. > > > > Thank you. > > >
