On 1/28/07, Keith Goodman <kwgoodman@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 1/28/07, Fernando Perez <fperez.net@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On 1/28/07, Keith Goodman < kwgoodman@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > On 1/28/07, Fernando Perez <fperez.net@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > [snip]  The test code uses double arrays, and SSE2 has double
> > > > precision support but it's purely 64-bit doubles.  SSE is
> > > > single-precision only, which means that for a double computation,
> > > > ATLAS isn't used and the Intel FPU does the computation instead.
> > >
> > > So since I use N.float64, ATLAS SSE won't help me?
> >
> > Well, the SSE part won't, but you're still better off with ATLAS than
> > with the default reference BLAS implementation.  I think even an ATLAS
> > SSE has special code for double (not using any SSE-type engine) that's
> > faster than the reference BLAS which is pure generic Fortran.  Someone
> > who knows the ATLAS internals please correct me if that's not the
> > case.
>
> That makes sense.
>
> Unfortunately my simulation gives different results with and without
> ATLAS SSE even though the test script I made doesn't detect the
> difference.

ATLAS BASE (no SSE or SSE2) also gives me different simulations
results even though it passes the test script.