arrayfire / arrayfire/arrayfire-python
Slow SVD
- Lenguaje dominante
- Python
- Estrellas
- 422
- Forks
- 63
- Métricas de merge de PR
- Sin PR fusionados en 30 d
Descripción
I found AF's SVD implementation is quite slow comparing to DGEMM with Radeon HD 7950/FGLRX driver on Debian Jessie:
```
In [47]: from pylab import randn, svd
In [48]: x_0 = randn(1000, 1000)
In [49]: %time y_0 = svd(x_0)
CPU times: user 1.24 s, sys: 1.01 s, total: 2.24 s
Wall time: 287 ms
In [50]: x_1 = af.Array(x_0.ctypes.data, x_0.shape, 'd')
In [51]: %time y_1 = af.svd(x_1)
CPU times: user 3.64 s, sys: 3.97 s, total: 7.62 s
Wall time: 3.25 s
```
AF's SVD takes more than 9 times of Numpy's SVD to solve the same matrix, However, the in DGEMM, AF is faster (but not much) than Numpy:
```
In [75]: from pylab import dot
In [76]: %time z_0 = dot(x_0.transpose(), x_0)
CPU times: user 52 ms, sys: 20 ms, total: 72 ms
Wall time: 10.6 ms
In [77]: %time z_1 = af.matmul(x_1.T, x_1)
CPU times: user 0 ns, sys: 0 ns, total: 0 ns
Wall time: 8.38 ms
```
I am wondering if there are anything I should tune/adjust before proceeding.
Guía de contribución
No hay ninguna guía de contribución indexada para este repositorio
Línea de trabajo
Start by reproducing the reported 1000x1000 benchmark using af.svd and compare it with NumPy's svd on the Radeon HD 7950/FGLRX and Debian Jessie setup described in the issue. Check the existing SVD implementation and its backend path; done means identifying and addressing the cause of the timing gap, with the benchmark showing improved results.
Escrito por el modelo de indexación a partir del texto del issue.
Evaluación
- Stack tecnológico
- python
- Área
- performance
- Tipo de issue
- Error
- Dificultad
- 4/5
- Tiempo estimado
- 3-5 días
- Estado de actividad
- Estancado
- Claridad
- Necesita aclaración
- Aptitud para principiantes
- 30/100