Hi FreeBSD developers, [the original article in Japanese can be found at http://blog.goo.ne.jp/nakatamaho/e/b5f6fbc3cc6e1ac4947463eb1ca4eb0a ]
*Abstract* I compared the peak performance of FreeBSD 8.0/amd64 and Ubuntu 9.10 amd64 using dgemm (a linear algebra routine, matrix-matrix multiplication). I obtained only 70% of theoretical peak performance on FreeBSD 8/amd64 and almost 95% on Ubuntu 9.10 /amd64. I'm really disappointed. *Introduction* I'm a friend of Gotoh Kazushige, the principal developers of GotoBLAS. He told me that FreeBSD is not suitable OS for scientific computing or high performance computing. He says (in Japanese and my translation): > I guess FreeBSD does page coloring, but I don't think FreeBSD considers very > large cache > size which recent CPU has. Support of a very large cache on Linux is still > not very will > sophisticated, but on *BSDs, its worst; they uses too fine memory allocation > method, > so we cannot expect large continuous physical memory allocation. > Moreover, process scheduling is not so nice as *BSD employs an algorithm that > changes physical CPUs in turn instead of allocating one core for such kind of > jobs. > Take your own benchmark, and you'll see.. *Result* Machine: Core i7 920 (42.56-44.8Gflops) / DDR3 1066 OS: FreeBSD 8.0/amd64 and Ubuntu 9.10 GotoBLAS2: 1.13 dgemm result OS : FLOPS : percent in peak FreeBSD : 32.0 GFlops : 71% Ubuntu : 42.0-42.7GFlops : 93.8%-95.3% Thanks, -- Nakata Maho http://accc.riken.jp/maho/ , http://ja.openoffice.org/ Nakata Maho's PGP public keys: http://accc.riken.jp/maho/maho.pgp.txt _______________________________________________ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
