
Table 4: Percentage of algorithmic peak performance of VIRAM and Imagine for N =3, M = 1,10,20 and L =1024

Page  4/4  Date  09.06.2018  Size  217.16 Kb.   #53784 

Table 4: Percentage of algorithmic peak performance of VIRAM and Imagine for N =3, M = 1,10,20 and L =1024
Figure 4: Percentage of algorithmic peak performance of Imagine with N =3 and K=1,5,10 using long streams and varying computational intensity

VIRAM (N=3)

Imagine (N=5)
 Ops/Word 
50

90

120

150

100

200

300

400

% Peak

82%

88%

89%

91%

86%

89%

90%

91%

Table 5: Achieving high efficiency for VIRAM and Imagine using long streams and high computational intensity
Figure 5: Performance crossover between VIRAM and Imagine for N =3 and M =10

VIRAM

Imagine

Matrix
Rows
(Nonzeros)

Performance

CRS

Segsum

Ellpack

CRS

Streams

Ellpack

LSHAPE 1008
(6958)

% of Peak

2.8%

7.4%

31%

1.1%

0.8%

1.2%

Total cycle

66823

23802

5666

40300

48190

37930

MFlop/s

44

118

496

170

142

186

LARGEDIS
10000
(177820)

% of Peak

3.2%

8.4%

32.0%

1.5%

0.6%

6.3%

Total cycle

802070

567491

641512

742310

1840380

753540

MFlop/s

91

135

511

240

97

1088

Table 6: Performance of SPMV on VIRAM and Imagine for the LSHAPE and LARGEDIS matrices using various algorithms

VIRAM

Imagine

Matrix

Performance

MITRE RT_STAP 192by96
complex matrix

% of Peak

34.1%

65.5%

Total Cycles

5188817

712770

MFlop/s

546

13,100

Table 7: Performance of QRD on VIRAM and Imagine for the 192by96 MITRE RT_STAP matrix
Share with your friends: 
The database is protected by copyright ©ua.originaldll.com 2024
send message

