Open CL vs. CILK

Zvi_Vered — Sat, 25 May 2013 06:47:15 GMT

Hello,

It seems CILK is much easier to use than Open CL.

Do you have any information of the performance of CILK vs. Open CL on the same machine (e.g Intel's Ivy-Bridge) ?

Does it depend on the what I'm trying to do ?

My interest is Signal Processing (FFT, matrix manipulation etc.)

Thanks,

Zvika

I don't think Clik(tm) Plus

TimP — Sat, 25 May 2013 12:52:11 GMT

I don't think Clik(tm) Plus (if you mean Intel's implementation) and OpenCL are suited to the same projects.

OpenCL was put forward as a way to support compatibility with applicatations architectures where C++ isn't suitable, not so much as a performance competitive alternative to Intel compilers.

It's in a relative early stage of development. It seems LLVM has only recently been attempting to catch up to gcc in performance. In part, Intel's claim to higher performance than gcc has been based on more aggressive default options, the use of #pragma optimization directives, and the performance libraries provided with Intel C++. The latter would appear to be important for your area of interest.

topic I don't think Clik(tm) Plus in Software Archive

Open CL vs. CILK

I don't think Clik(tm) Plus