On Monday, February 2, 2015 at 9:43:50 AM UTC-8, Seth wrote: > > From https://github.com/JuliaLang/julia/pull/7662 I learned about > peakflops(), so I decided to give it a try and am seeing very strange > performance. > > On my Macbook Pro, I get 1.6950987382609034e9. This is slower than what's > in the screenshot at the PR. > Julia Version 0.4.0-dev+2529 > Commit 322cf26* (2015-01-06 17:18 UTC) > Platform Info: > System: Darwin (x86_64-apple-darwin14.1.0) > CPU: Intel(R) Core(TM) i7-3820QM CPU @ 2.70GHz > WORD_SIZE: 64 > BLAS: libopenblas (USE64BITINT DYNAMIC_ARCH NO_AFFINITY Sandybridge) > LAPACK: libopenblas > LIBM: libopenlibm > LLVM: libLLVM-3.3 > > > > On my Mac Mini, I get 4.138266605094777e10 > Julia Version 0.4.0-dev+2481 > Commit 3735e01 (2015-01-04 18:57 UTC) > Platform Info: > System: Darwin (x86_64-apple-darwin14.0.0) > CPU: Intel(R) Core(TM) i5-3210M CPU @ 2.50GHz > WORD_SIZE: 64 > BLAS: libopenblas (USE64BITINT DYNAMIC_ARCH NO_AFFINITY Sandybridge) > LAPACK: libopenblas > LIBM: libopenlibm > LLVM: libLLVM-3.3 > > > > Why would I be seeing worse performance from a quad-core i7 than a > dual-core i5? > > > Sorry to follow up on my own post, but running v0.3.4 on the MBP seems to brighten the picture considerably. Why is there such a difference between 0.3 and 0.4?
julia> peakflops() 8.281406670627525e10 julia> versioninfo() Julia Version 0.3.4 Commit 3392026* (2014-12-26 10:42 UTC) Platform Info: System: Darwin (x86_64-apple-darwin13.4.0) CPU: Intel(R) Core(TM) i7-3820QM CPU @ 2.70GHz WORD_SIZE: 64 BLAS: libopenblas (USE64BITINT DYNAMIC_ARCH NO_AFFINITY Sandybridge) LAPACK: libopenblas LIBM: libopenlibm LLVM: libLLVM-3.3
