Date: Wed, 29 Feb 2012 19:40:32 +1100 (EST) From: Bruce Evans <brde@optusnet.com.au> To: "Thomas D. Dean" <tomdean@speakeasy.org> Cc: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Gcc46 and 128 Bit Floating Point Message-ID: <20120229192417.U3167@besplex.bde.org> In-Reply-To: <4F4DDCE7.9000008@speakeasy.org> References: <4F3EA37F.9010207@speakeasy.org> <CAGE5yCpvF0-b1iKAVGbya=fUNaYbGyrpj1PHSQxw4BvycNMLDg@mail.gmail.com> <4F3EC0B4.6050107@speakeasy.org> <4F4DA398.6070703@speakeasy.org> <20120229161408.G2514@besplex.bde.org> <4F4DDCE7.9000008@speakeasy.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, 29 Feb 2012, Thomas D. Dean wrote: > On 02/28/12 22:03, Bruce Evans wrote: >> >> But why would you want it? It is essentially unusable on sparc64, >> since it is several thousand times slower than 80-bit floating point >> on i386. At equal CPU clock speeds, it is only about 1000 times slower. >> ... > > I have an application that takes 10 days to run on a 4.16GHz Core-i7 3930K. > No output until it finishes. Look elsewhere :-). 1000 times slower than that would be bad :-). > When I first started looking at this, I naively thought the 80-bit FPU floats > were scaled to 128-bits. Would be nice... > > The application uses libgmp, but, about 1/2 to 2/3 of the work will fit in a > 128-bit float. libgmp is probably slow for the same reasons that multi-word software FP is slow -- it has to do similar things to combine the words. But it is much older so it it likely to be smarter about combining the words, and might already know how to use vectors on AVX. Combining the words seems to be much harder with floating point words, so you probably don't want floating point if you only need large integers. Bruce
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20120229192417.U3167>