arrayfire / arrayfire/arrayfire-python
Slow SVD
- Langage dominant
- Python
- Étoiles
- 422
- Forks
- 63
- Métriques de merge des PR
- Aucune PR mergée en 30 j
Description
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.
Guide de contribution
Aucun guide de contribution indexé pour ce dépôt
Piste de recherche
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.
Rédigé par le modèle d'indexation à partir du texte de l'issue.
Évaluation
- Stack technique
- python
- Domaine
- performance
- Type d'issue
- Bug
- Difficulté
- 4/5
- Temps estimé
- 3-5 jours
- Activité
- À l'abandon
- Clarté
- À clarifier
- Accessibilité débutants
- 30/100