IPP Itanium2 vs Pentium/Xeon

rayheath — Sun, 02 May 2004 07:02:45 GMT

What specific portions of IPP benefit most from Itanium2 processors?

That is, I would suppose that almost all IPP library methods are faster on a moderate (1.40GHz with 1.5MB L3 cache) Itanium2 than on the latest generation of Xeon/Pentium family of processors; but I suspect that while some are only marginally faster, others are remarkably faster (then again, my seat-of-the-pants impressions are often wrong) [1].

Are there exhaustive test results available for comparison? If not, what is the canonical theology (i.e., about specific functionality sets, rather than a general statement that Itanium2 is faster)?

Whatever the current state, how (specifically) do you expect the comparison to trend as all Intel processor lines mature?

Regards,

Ray Heath

[1] And indeed, I would generally expect a response curve where the size of the data being processed becomes a primary driver for the comparison (e.g., compared to cache size, tiny-data / medium-data / large-data / very-large-and-therefore-necessarily-streaming-data would exhibit very different IPP effectiveness ratios across the different processors).

Re: IPP Itanium2 vs Pentium/Xeon

borix — Wed, 05 May 2004 11:39:08 GMT

Hi Ray,

yes, Itanium2 is faster, especially with the IPP functions processing FP data, for example, FFT & DFT transform and filtering. This is fundamental feature - Itanium2 is faster Xeon. Performance numbers for all IPP domains are available in the product toolsperfsysdata folder.

Boris

Re: IPP Itanium2 vs Pentium/Xeon

rayheath — Thu, 06 May 2004 01:02:05 GMT

Thanks Boris - Exactly the kind of information we needed!

Regards,

Ray Heath

topic Re: IPP Itanium2 vs Pentium/Xeon in Intel® Integrated Performance Primitives

IPP Itanium2 vs Pentium/Xeon

Re: IPP Itanium2 vs Pentium/Xeon

Re: IPP Itanium2 vs Pentium/Xeon