<?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 OMP_NUM_THREADS and MKL in Intel® oneAPI Math Kernel Library</title>
    <link>https://community.intel.com/t5/Intel-oneAPI-Math-Kernel-Library/OMP-NUM-THREADS-and-MKL/m-p/882992#M9753</link>
    <description>Hi,&lt;BR /&gt;being a novice with MKL usage on DualCore machine, I am completely confused...&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;I have a FORTRAN code, which is dominated by BLAS/LAPACK calls, no OMP pragmas.&lt;BR /&gt;The code is compiled by ifort with -openmp, and linked to MKL library.&lt;BR /&gt;Running this code with no OMP_NUM_THREADS set, or with =1, I got faster time comparing with run with OMP_NUM_THREADS=2. &lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;I thought that I will see an improvement, by allowing MKL to use 2 cores, but the result is oposite.&lt;BR /&gt;What can be wrong??&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Wed, 14 Feb 2007 16:01:03 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>valera_veryazov</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2007-02-14T16:01:03Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>OMP_NUM_THREADS and MKL</title>
      <link>https://community.intel.com/t5/Intel-oneAPI-Math-Kernel-Library/OMP-NUM-THREADS-and-MKL/m-p/882992#M9753</link>
      <description>Hi,&lt;BR /&gt;being a novice with MKL usage on DualCore machine, I am completely confused...&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;I have a FORTRAN code, which is dominated by BLAS/LAPACK calls, no OMP pragmas.&lt;BR /&gt;The code is compiled by ifort with -openmp, and linked to MKL library.&lt;BR /&gt;Running this code with no OMP_NUM_THREADS set, or with =1, I got faster time comparing with run with OMP_NUM_THREADS=2. &lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;I thought that I will see an improvement, by allowing MKL to use 2 cores, but the result is oposite.&lt;BR /&gt;What can be wrong??&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 14 Feb 2007 16:01:03 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.intel.com/t5/Intel-oneAPI-Math-Kernel-Library/OMP-NUM-THREADS-and-MKL/m-p/882992#M9753</guid>
      <dc:creator>valera_veryazov</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2007-02-14T16:01:03Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: OMP_NUM_THREADS and MKL</title>
      <link>https://community.intel.com/t5/Intel-oneAPI-Math-Kernel-Library/OMP-NUM-THREADS-and-MKL/m-p/882993#M9754</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Hi,&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;May be the problem is with your method of measuring running time. If you are using cpu_time(), then take into account that this function returns total time consumed on both CPU's, e.g. if your program ran for 1 minute with total load of both processors, this function will return 2 minutes (1 min for one CPU +1 min for another one), which would compare unfavorably to the running time on 1 CPU due to some overhead.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 15 Feb 2007 06:27:26 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.intel.com/t5/Intel-oneAPI-Math-Kernel-Library/OMP-NUM-THREADS-and-MKL/m-p/882993#M9754</guid>
      <dc:creator>izryu</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2007-02-15T06:27:26Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: OMP_NUM_THREADS and MKL</title>
      <link>https://community.intel.com/t5/Intel-oneAPI-Math-Kernel-Library/OMP-NUM-THREADS-and-MKL/m-p/882994#M9755</link>
      <description>Thanks! It was indeed my stupidity - to look at CPU time :(&lt;BR /&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 15 Feb 2007 11:24:50 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.intel.com/t5/Intel-oneAPI-Math-Kernel-Library/OMP-NUM-THREADS-and-MKL/m-p/882994#M9755</guid>
      <dc:creator>valera_veryazov</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2007-02-15T11:24:50Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

