<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:taxo="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/taxonomy/" version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>topic Re: Two questions... in Intel® oneAPI Math Kernel Library</title>
    <link>https://community.intel.com/t5/Intel-oneAPI-Math-Kernel-Library/Two-questions/m-p/943664#M14703</link>
    <description>Recent versions of MKL include em64t support for Windows x64.  lapack incorporates Fortran WRITEs, so it depends on the ifort run-time library.  Those functions would not work with the Portland compiler library.  The MKL and compiler must both be 64-bit, or both 32-bit. Either combination will run on 64-bit Windows.  The full distribution of ifort 9.x includes both compilers, just as MKL does.  ifort 8.1 has a separate em64t compiler, available only by download. &lt;BR /&gt;Generally speaking, you would get similar performance from MKL on a dual core CPU to what you see on dual single core CPUs.</description>
    <pubDate>Sat, 25 Feb 2006 05:34:11 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>TimP</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2006-02-25T05:34:11Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>Two questions...</title>
      <link>https://community.intel.com/t5/Intel-oneAPI-Math-Kernel-Library/Two-questions/m-p/943663#M14702</link>
      <description>&lt;DIV&gt;&lt;/DIV&gt;
&lt;DIV&gt;1) Will these MKL and Lapack Libs work running Windows XP 64 bit OS and an intel (or portland group) fortran compiler?&lt;/DIV&gt;
&lt;DIV&gt;&lt;/DIV&gt;
&lt;DIV&gt;2) Will this exploite the dual-core features of todays CPU's? How does this compare to multi threaded 2 cpu performance. &lt;/DIV&gt;
&lt;DIV&gt;&lt;/DIV&gt;
&lt;DIV&gt;Thanks in advance&lt;/DIV&gt;
&lt;DIV&gt;&lt;/DIV&gt;
&lt;DIV&gt;Jim&lt;/DIV&gt;
&lt;DIV&gt;&lt;/DIV&gt;&lt;P&gt;Message Edited by jimfraser@adelphia.net on &lt;SPAN class="date_text"&gt;02-24-2006&lt;/SPAN&gt; &lt;SPAN class="time_text"&gt;06:00 AM&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 24 Feb 2006 21:59:12 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.intel.com/t5/Intel-oneAPI-Math-Kernel-Library/Two-questions/m-p/943663#M14702</guid>
      <dc:creator>jimfraser</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2006-02-24T21:59:12Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Two questions...</title>
      <link>https://community.intel.com/t5/Intel-oneAPI-Math-Kernel-Library/Two-questions/m-p/943664#M14703</link>
      <description>Recent versions of MKL include em64t support for Windows x64.  lapack incorporates Fortran WRITEs, so it depends on the ifort run-time library.  Those functions would not work with the Portland compiler library.  The MKL and compiler must both be 64-bit, or both 32-bit. Either combination will run on 64-bit Windows.  The full distribution of ifort 9.x includes both compilers, just as MKL does.  ifort 8.1 has a separate em64t compiler, available only by download. &lt;BR /&gt;Generally speaking, you would get similar performance from MKL on a dual core CPU to what you see on dual single core CPUs.</description>
      <pubDate>Sat, 25 Feb 2006 05:34:11 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.intel.com/t5/Intel-oneAPI-Math-Kernel-Library/Two-questions/m-p/943664#M14703</guid>
      <dc:creator>TimP</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2006-02-25T05:34:11Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Two questions...</title>
      <link>https://community.intel.com/t5/Intel-oneAPI-Math-Kernel-Library/Two-questions/m-p/943665#M14704</link>
      <description>&lt;DIV&gt;Thank you for that reply Tim, it will help me make a purchasing decsion.&lt;/DIV&gt;
&lt;DIV&gt;&lt;/DIV&gt;
&lt;DIV&gt;Jim&lt;/DIV&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 06 Mar 2006 01:31:40 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.intel.com/t5/Intel-oneAPI-Math-Kernel-Library/Two-questions/m-p/943665#M14704</guid>
      <dc:creator>jimfraser</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2006-03-06T01:31:40Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

