[gambit-list] New gcc and gambit
Bradley Lucier
lucier at math.purdue.edu
Fri Apr 1 15:10:07 EDT 2011
I tried some preliminary tests of the newly released gcc-4.6.0 with
Gambit, and things look pretty good.
I was looking just at how long the routine direct-fft-recursive-4 in
lib/_num.scm took to execute on an array of $2^{25}$ complex doubles.
Here are various execution times comparing gcc-4.6.0 with the gcc-4.5.1
that ships with Ubuntu 10.10. I just did "./configure CC=...; make" on
plain manilla gambit-4.6.0 with default optimization "-O1
-fschedule-insns2":
4.5.1:
3180 ms cpu time (3160 user, 20 system)
4.6.0:
2910 ms cpu time (2910 user, 0 system)
That's quite the improvement, nearly 10%
I also added -fschedule-insns to the optimization list:
4.5.1 -fschedule-insns:
2870 ms cpu time (2870 user, 0 system)
4.6.0 -fschedule-insns:
2730 ms cpu time (2730 user, 0 system)
Still about a 5% improvement.
Since there are 5 N \log_2 N operations in an FFT of size N, that last
time represents 1.536 Gflops on my
model name : Intel(R) Core(TM)2 Quad CPU Q8200 @ 2.33GHz
FFTW3 out-of-place (i.e, the same result, but not the same algorithm)
achieves almost exactly 2 Gflops on a 3.0 GHz machine with a better
memory system:
http://www.fftw.org/speed/CoreDuo-3.0GHz-icc64/
Scaling the results on my machine to the higher clock rate gives
> (* 1.56 3.0 (/ 2.33))
2.008583690987124
(I don't feel like benchmarking fftw3 on my own machine, sorry.)
So who says you can't do scientific computing in Scheme?
Brad
PS: This is no April Fools joke!
More information about the Gambit-list
mailing list