Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

Array multiplication vs element multiplication discrepancy

I discovered a discrepancy between array multiplication and element multiplication with the Intel Fortran compiler, and have a small reproducer here. Is this expected behavior? The discrepancy is very small (seems like one bit), and it only occurs with -O2 and higher, so it seems like an optimization bug to me. I tested it on three machines: a Xeon E5-2650 v3, a Xeon E5-2697 v3, and an i7-6600U.

Any insights on this? Thanks!


! Compiled with:
!   ifort -o array_mult_disc array_mult_disc.F90
! Tested with Intel 17.0.6 and 18.0.3. The discrepancy is not
! reproduced with -O0 or -O1, nor is it reproduced by gfortran
! or nagfor compilers.
! Demonstrates discrepancy with array and element-wise multiplication
! with Intel Fortran. Order of operations remains the same, but whether
! performing array multiplication, element multiplication, or element
! multiplication of a copy, different answers are produced.

program array_mult_disc

  use,intrinsic :: iso_fortran_env, only: r8 => real64
  implicit none

  real(r8) :: t1, t2

  ! if the dimension here is set to 1, both discrepancies disappear
  real(r8), dimension(2) :: a, b, c, d, e

  a = 1.0_r8 / 3.0_r8
  b = 1.0_r8 / 7.0_r8
  c = 1.0_r8 / 13.0_r8

  ! array multiplication produces a different
  ! result than element multiplication
  e = (a * b) * c
  t1 = (a(1) * b(1)) * c(1)
  print '(es30.20)', t1
  print '(es30.20, es13.3)', e(1), e(1) - t1

  ! element multiplication of a copy produces
  ! a different result than the original
  d = c
  t2 = (a(1) * b(1)) * d(1)
  print '(es30.20, es13.3)', t2, t2 - t1

  ! The following line is necessary for the second discrepancy to appear
  print '(es13.3)', d(1)

end program array_mult_disc


0 Kudos
2 Replies
Black Belt

It is not a bug.  By default,

It is not a bug.  By default, certain optimisations are enabled that may result in small variations in the results of floating point calculations.  You can disable those optimisations with appropriate compile options. has more information.

0 Kudos

Thank you, that was exactly

Thank you, that was exactly it. "-fp-model precise" removes the discrepancy.

0 Kudos