[Users] ET on AMD Epyc cores?

[Erik Schnetter]

Geraint

Regarding BLAS: I recommend using OpenBLAS instead of MKL there (but
haven't compared performance). There is a thorn
ExternalLibraries/OpenBLAS (part of the ET, but not enabled by
default) that interfaces to OpenBLAS and/or builds OpenBLAS if it is
not already available on the system.

I am not aware of any issues. Regarding benchmarking, thorn
CactusUtils/Vectors supports SIMD vectorization, and it should already
support Epyc. From the technical discussions on the web it seems that
they should be well suited for the ET. In particular the large L1
instruction cache should be quite beneficial.

Thank you for the pointer to the Prace best Epyc practices.

-erik

On Mon, Jan 20, 2020 at 11:50 AM Geraint Pratten
<geraint.pratten at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hi everyone,
>
> Does anyone have any experience running on AMD Epyc cores? It seems that these are becoming quite trendy and I found a pretty decent best practice guide that Prace released
>
> http://www.prace-ri.eu/best-practice-guide-amd-epyc
>
> However, whenever I've compiled ET recently its typically been on Intel cores + Intel compiler + Intel MKL etc. However, Intel MKL is notorious for being subotpimal on non-Intel cores. Does anyone know of any possible issues that could arise when running ET on AMD Epyc cores? Similarly (and likely optimistically), has anyone had the chance to benchmark the performance of ET on the AMD cores?
>
> Thanks!
> Geraint
> _______________________________________________
> Users mailing list
> Users at einsteintoolkit.org
> http://lists.einsteintoolkit.org/mailman/listinfo/users



-- 
Erik Schnetter <schnetter at cct.lsu.edu>
http://www.perimeterinstitute.ca/personal/eschnetter/