Re: Performance on 64 bit OS
- To: mathgroup at smc.vnet.net
- Subject: [mg103104] Re: [mg103075] Performance on 64 bit OS
- From: John Fultz <jfultz at wolfram.com>
- Date: Tue, 8 Sep 2009 05:57:32 -0400 (EDT)
- Reply-to: jfultz at wolfram.com
It's a myth that 64-bit CPUs and operating systems are or ought to be faster than an equivalent 32-bit CPU or operating system. In reality, there are some things that they can do faster due to the much larger internal registers and other mechanisms provided by the extra width. But on the down side, every pointer is now 64-bits wide, which means that a lot of the data sitting in memory just got bloated by a fair amount, causing more cache misses which affects performance the other way. So, if you're moving to 64-bit hardware/OS because you expect a performance increase over 32-bit hardware, you might be making a mistake unless benchmarks which are relevant to what you'll actually be doing prove you right. The one thing you will most definitely get out of a 64-bit upgrade, though, is the ability to address much more memory. This advantage, by itself, is enough for many power users to switch. I say all of this without commenting on your specific benchmark numbers. This computation is out of my area, and I can't say whether the numbers you'reseeing are reasonable. You should interpret my remarks above as general statements rather than an attempt to specifically explain the benchmarks you've observed. As for your second question, Mathematica does not presently take advantage of OpenCL or any other GPU-based computation (aside from those used for hardware-accelerated graphics rendering, of course). We're certainly investigating these technologies, and that's all I can say for now. Sincerely, John Fultz jfultz at wolfram.com User Interface Group Wolfram Research, Inc. On Mon, 7 Sep 2009 02:35:04 -0400 (EDT), fd wrote: > Hi All > > I recently run a BenchmarkReport[] on my machine at work (Core 2 duo > @2.66GHz, 4GB DDR2 RAM on windows xp 32 bit, NVIDIA graphs with > 512MB). I wanted to make a comparison with my laptop, a much newer > macbook pro (Core 2 @2.53, 4GB DDR3 RAM, NVIDIA 256 on Snow leopard). > > Though my desktop machine is slightly faster, it was running a 32 bit > operating system, so I was expecting the mac to be at least marginally > better. My surprise was when I got an overall of 2.96 with windows XP > against 2.41 for the Mac (after 4 tests, mean time 35.73 mac x 29.16 > windows) > > Individually the biggest difference appears to be on test 5 - > Elementary functions - (2.52 Windows x 7.38 on a Mac). The mac was > better at tests 8,7 and 6 (Matrix arithmetic, Large Integer > multiplication and gamma function) with scores of respectively 3.69 x > 2.86, 0.94 x 0.53 and 0.53 x 0.29, which makes sense. > > Is this expected? or am I doing something wrong on my 64 bit operating > system machine? > > Another question is whether Mathematica will take advantage of OpenCL > technology (or any GPGPU technology as windows 7 is promising) > > Best