<?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 performance of VML  in Intel® oneAPI Math Kernel Library</title>
    <link>https://community.intel.com/t5/Intel-oneAPI-Math-Kernel-Library/performance-of-VML/m-p/885262#M9990</link>
    <description>&lt;P&gt;Hi, &lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;I am working on speeding up my program with VML. The following is my test:&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;start = clock();&lt;BR /&gt; for(int j = 0; j&amp;lt;1000; j++)&lt;BR /&gt; vsHypot(800, xx, yy, zz);&lt;BR /&gt;end = clock();&lt;BR /&gt;report time;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;start = clock();&lt;BR /&gt;for(int j=0; j&amp;lt;1000; j++){&lt;BR /&gt; for (int i=0; i&amp;lt;800; ++i)&lt;BR /&gt; zz&lt;I&gt; = (float)(hypot(xx&lt;I&gt;, yy&lt;I&gt;));&lt;BR /&gt;}&lt;BR /&gt;end = clock();&lt;BR /&gt;report time;&lt;/I&gt;&lt;/I&gt;&lt;/I&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Basically, xx yy and zz are array of float with length of 800. I found that using vsHypot function is lower than using element-by-elementy calculation hypot by about 5-6 times. My program is running on AMD64 machine and I used "-Wl,--start-group -lmkl_intel_lp64 -lmkl_intel_thread -lmkl_core -Wl,--end-group -lguide -lpthread -limf -lirc -lm" to compile. Did you see anything wrong with my test and why it is so low to use VML function?&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Thanks,&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Xiaoping&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Tue, 16 Sep 2008 22:47:56 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>feiwu1979</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2008-09-16T22:47:56Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>performance of VML</title>
      <link>https://community.intel.com/t5/Intel-oneAPI-Math-Kernel-Library/performance-of-VML/m-p/885262#M9990</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Hi, &lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;I am working on speeding up my program with VML. The following is my test:&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;start = clock();&lt;BR /&gt; for(int j = 0; j&amp;lt;1000; j++)&lt;BR /&gt; vsHypot(800, xx, yy, zz);&lt;BR /&gt;end = clock();&lt;BR /&gt;report time;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;start = clock();&lt;BR /&gt;for(int j=0; j&amp;lt;1000; j++){&lt;BR /&gt; for (int i=0; i&amp;lt;800; ++i)&lt;BR /&gt; zz&lt;I&gt; = (float)(hypot(xx&lt;I&gt;, yy&lt;I&gt;));&lt;BR /&gt;}&lt;BR /&gt;end = clock();&lt;BR /&gt;report time;&lt;/I&gt;&lt;/I&gt;&lt;/I&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Basically, xx yy and zz are array of float with length of 800. I found that using vsHypot function is lower than using element-by-elementy calculation hypot by about 5-6 times. My program is running on AMD64 machine and I used "-Wl,--start-group -lmkl_intel_lp64 -lmkl_intel_thread -lmkl_core -Wl,--end-group -lguide -lpthread -limf -lirc -lm" to compile. Did you see anything wrong with my test and why it is so low to use VML function?&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Thanks,&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Xiaoping&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 16 Sep 2008 22:47:56 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.intel.com/t5/Intel-oneAPI-Math-Kernel-Library/performance-of-VML/m-p/885262#M9990</guid>
      <dc:creator>feiwu1979</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2008-09-16T22:47:56Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: performance of VML</title>
      <link>https://community.intel.com/t5/Intel-oneAPI-Math-Kernel-Library/performance-of-VML/m-p/885263#M9991</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Xiaoping,&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Your timing system looks ok. Thank you for the catch. We will look forward to fix it.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Thanks,&lt;BR /&gt;Ilya&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 19 Sep 2008 06:32:51 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.intel.com/t5/Intel-oneAPI-Math-Kernel-Library/performance-of-VML/m-p/885263#M9991</guid>
      <dc:creator>Ilya_B_Intel</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2008-09-19T06:32:51Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

