> > I think the early version of ACML lagged behind others, but recent > versions are competitive. I've run into precision problem (failing > make check all) with some Goto BLAS before. Also, Goto BLAS has > switched to a more restrictive license (probably not a problem for > you though). >
No, probably not a problem for us at this end, but good to know. I'm happy to give the latest version of ACML a try. In fact, it occurred to me that it would probably be worth comparing relative performance. I know that benchmarking is a technical issue, but I would be curious to see how some of our compute-intensive jobs perform. > > >> 3) compilation of BLAS - I can compile for 32-bit, or 64-bit. >> Presumably, given we've invested in 64-bit chips, and a >> 64-bit OS, we'd like to consider a 64-bit compilation. Which, >> also presumably, means we'd need 64-bit compilation for [R]. >> While I've read the short blurb on CRAN concerning 64-bi vs >> 32-bit compilations (data size vs speed), I'd be happy to >> have both on our machine. But, I'm not sure how one specifies >> 64-bits in the [R] compilation - what flags to I need to set >> during ./configure, or what config file do I need to edit? >> > > That's up to the compiler(s) you use (unstated). For GCC, I believe > -m64/-m32 is the flag. For 64-bit GCC -m64 is the default. > > Andy > Thanks indeed. ______________________________________________ R-devel@r-project.org mailing list https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
