Re: Openssl on Itanium
Diarmuid Oneill wrote: > I have found out that the 0.9.6 distributions of OSSL do not include > Itanium assembly implementations for much (maybe any Itanium assembly > at all, I didn't look) of the CPU intensive operations, including > RSA/ModExp. So OSSL uses the C routines which are, to say the least, > not optimum. > It's also worth remebering that the Itanium uses EPIC(explicitly > parallel instruction computing) and that in order to see the > performance it's capable of it must be programmed appropriately. It > has been suggested that if there were optimised assmebly routines for > the Itanium it would certainly beat the P3 Mhz/Mhz. > Anyone care to comment on this? If you use GCC, the IA-64 target *IS* an optimizing compiler that can re-order instruction for EPIC. Or weren't you aware of the whole concept of EPIC, compiler-based optimization? -- TheBS -- Bryan "TheBS" Smith mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]chat:thebs413 Engineer AbsoluteValue Systems, Inc. http://www.linux-wlan.org PresidentSmithConcepts, Inc.http://www.SmithConcepts.com __ OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org User Support Mailing List[EMAIL PROTECTED] Automated List Manager [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Openssl on Itanium
Sorry should have had subject Re OpenSSL on itanium Hi, I have done a bit of research into this topic and some of my findings directly oppose what was said about the itanium not matching the P3 Mhz to Mhz. I have found out that the 0.9.6 distributions of OSSL do not include Itanium assembly implementations for much (maybe any Itanium assembly at all, I didn't look) of the CPU intensive operations, including RSA/ModExp. So OSSL uses the C routines which are, to say the least, not optimum. It's also worth remebering that the Itanium uses EPIC(explicitly parallel instruction computing) and that in order to see the performance it's capable of it must be programmed appropriately. It has been suggested that if there were optimised assmebly routines for the Itanium it would certainly beat the P3 Mhz/Mhz. Anyone care to comment on this? Thanks, Diarmuid Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com __ OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org User Support Mailing List[EMAIL PROTECTED] Automated List Manager [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: OpenSSL on itanium [going offtopic]
On Tue, 21 Aug 2001, chirs charter wrote: > Nice observations. The alpha is gone now? When did DEC > discontinue it? DEC was discontinued. Its corpse was dismembered and sold to various companies, and Compaq got most of the silicon designs (including the aXp and the DS21x4x "Tulip" Ethernet chip) after the manufacturing facilities were sold to Intel.* Now Compaq has sold the processor design itself to Intel, prompting fears that it will die as soon as existing contracts expire. Maybe at least Intel will finally learn something about computer organization by studying it. -- * Cabletron got most of the networking gear, Quantum acquired the disk and tape drives, and Oracle got RDB. Compaq also got the VAX and Alpha gear and the StorageWorks unit. Some outfit I'd never heard of got the terminals and printers unit and was still making VT5xx last I heard. Anybody know whatever happened to the "Dragon" graphics chip? -- Mark H. Wood, Lead System Programmer [EMAIL PROTECTED] Make a good day. __ OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org User Support Mailing List[EMAIL PROTECTED] Automated List Manager [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: OpenSSL on itanium
You know that DEC's been discontinued (bought by Compaq)? I read that Compaq is selling (sold?) the Alpha to Intel right now. um = micrometer (millionth of a meter) which is the track width of the microprocessor. I thought 0.15um was state of the art, but it seems that it's now 0.13um. 0.35um is older technology. Regards, Steven -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of chirs charter Sent: Wednesday, 22 August 2001 9:44 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: OpenSSL on itanium Nice observations. The alpha is gone now? When did DEC discontinue it? Lastly in the measurement what does "um" stand for? Thanks --- Bryan-TheBS-Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Diarmuid Oneill wrote: > > When I download and build OpenSSL (which works > fine!) and run the > > openssl speed rsa1024 tests, I get around 68 rsa > signings/sec. When I > > run this on a 4 CPU (700Mhz) P3 machine I get > around 103 private rsa > > signings/sec. I understand that the test is > running on 1 cpu only but > > that's the case for both machines. > > It looks like most of the functions are integer. > Itanium is slower, MHz > for MHz, than just about any x86 Pro+ processor at > integer (even using > optimized code). Only at floating point does > Itanium do about 2x a P3, > MHz for MHz (and the P4 is slower than the P3, MHz > for MHz, unless you > use "lossy"/interpolated SSE instructions). > > -- TheBS > > P.S. It's sad to see a 3-year old design at 0.35um, > the Alpha 264 > 667MHz/4MB, can toast the 0.13um Itanium 733MHz/4MB > at floating point. > Too bad Alpha is gone now. > > -- > Bryan "TheBS" Smith mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > chat:thebs413 > Engineer AbsoluteValue Systems, Inc. > http://www.linux-wlan.org > PresidentSmithConcepts, Inc. > http://www.SmithConcepts.com > __ > OpenSSL Project > http://www.openssl.org > User Support Mailing List > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Automated List Manager [EMAIL PROTECTED] __ Do You Yahoo!? Make international calls for as low as $.04/minute with Yahoo! Messenger http://phonecard.yahoo.com/ __ OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org User Support Mailing List[EMAIL PROTECTED] Automated List Manager [EMAIL PROTECTED] __ OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org User Support Mailing List[EMAIL PROTECTED] Automated List Manager [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: OpenSSL on itanium
Nice observations. The alpha is gone now? When did DEC discontinue it? Lastly in the measurement what does "um" stand for? Thanks --- Bryan-TheBS-Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Diarmuid Oneill wrote: > > When I download and build OpenSSL (which works > fine!) and run the > > openssl speed rsa1024 tests, I get around 68 rsa > signings/sec. When I > > run this on a 4 CPU (700Mhz) P3 machine I get > around 103 private rsa > > signings/sec. I understand that the test is > running on 1 cpu only but > > that's the case for both machines. > > It looks like most of the functions are integer. > Itanium is slower, MHz > for MHz, than just about any x86 Pro+ processor at > integer (even using > optimized code). Only at floating point does > Itanium do about 2x a P3, > MHz for MHz (and the P4 is slower than the P3, MHz > for MHz, unless you > use "lossy"/interpolated SSE instructions). > > -- TheBS > > P.S. It's sad to see a 3-year old design at 0.35um, > the Alpha 264 > 667MHz/4MB, can toast the 0.13um Itanium 733MHz/4MB > at floating point. > Too bad Alpha is gone now. > > -- > Bryan "TheBS" Smith mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > chat:thebs413 > Engineer AbsoluteValue Systems, Inc. > http://www.linux-wlan.org > PresidentSmithConcepts, Inc. > http://www.SmithConcepts.com > __ > OpenSSL Project > http://www.openssl.org > User Support Mailing List > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Automated List Manager [EMAIL PROTECTED] __ Do You Yahoo!? Make international calls for as low as $.04/minute with Yahoo! Messenger http://phonecard.yahoo.com/ __ OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org User Support Mailing List[EMAIL PROTECTED] Automated List Manager [EMAIL PROTECTED]
