Christopher,
I expect the bus speed will also be important.
Doug Reeder
On Sep 12, 2011, at 9:48 AM, Christopher Rush wrote:
> It's interesting, out of curiosity I copied the benchmark results from Mark's
> page into Excel and did some sorting. There are a good number of 3.0 GHz CPU
> results.
It's interesting, out of curiosity I copied the benchmark results from Mark's
page into Excel and did some sorting. There are a good number of 3.0 GHz CPU
results. At a glance without any real technical analysis it looks like the
processor cache has a more significant impact on benchmark perform
Randolph,
I just added the data to the Benchmark page. He used "-O3 -xHost"
Mark
http://markjstock.org/pages/rad_bench.html
On Mon, 12 Sep 2011, Randolph M. Fritz wrote:
What level of optimization did you use with icc?
Randolph
On 2011-09-11 14:01:29 -0700, Guy Vaessen said:
>> The perfor
What level of optimization did you use with icc?
Randolph
On 2011-09-11 14:01:29 -0700, Guy Vaessen said:
>> The performance of the Intel compiler is worse than the gcc compiler 4.5.2.
> Do you mean it takes longer to compile, or that Radiance runs more
> slowly compiled by icc?
Radiance run
