RE: AMBER: Portland Group vs. Intel Compilers.

From: Ross Walker <ross.rosswalker.co.uk>
Date: Tue, 23 Oct 2007 10:35:45 -0700

Hi Aaron and Alex,

I use the Intel compilers as part of Amber development and have never had
any compilation problems with any version of the compilers. Of course there
are several compiler bugs that can bite in places after compilation but we
have worked around most of these now. The Portland group compilers on the
other hand have always caused me more problems. One big issue was having to
force 32 bit compilation on x86_64 chips to work around a major problem in
the Portland group compiler. This of course causes problems linking to the
x86_64 optimized MKL libraries.

So my general advice is to get the latest Intel compiler and use this. This
generally appears to give the best performance on x86 / x86_64 architectures
including AMD Opterons.

What problems are you seeing with the Intel compilers?

All the best
Ross

/\
\/
|\oss Walker

| HPC Consultant and Staff Scientist |
| San Diego Supercomputer Center |
| Tel: +1 858 822 0854 | EMail:- ross.rosswalker.co.uk |
| http://www.rosswalker.co.uk | PGP Key available on request |

Note: Electronic Mail is not secure, has no guarantee of delivery, may not
be read every day, and should not be used for urgent or sensitive issues.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-amber.scripps.edu
> [mailto:owner-amber.scripps.edu] On Behalf Of Alexandar T Tzanov
> Sent: Tuesday, October 23, 2007 10:12
> To: amber.scripps.edu
> Subject: Re: AMBER: Portland Group vs. Intel Compilers.
>
> I did not have any problems with Intel C and F 10.0.xx
> compiling Amber under
> Suse 10.Maybe you're using other versions? If using 9.0 i.e
> you must use
> gnu 400 option to make compilation.
>
> Alex
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Aaron Greenwood <agreenwo.uci.edu>
> Date: Tuesday, October 23, 2007 1:05 pm
> Subject: AMBER: Portland Group vs. Intel Compilers.
> To: amber.scripps.edu
>
>
> > Even through the Intel C and FORTRAN compilers are without
> cost there
> >
> > seems to be a lot more problems using them to compile AMBER
> than using
> >
> > Portland Group compilers. I am not trying to start a
> religious war
> > but
> > would appreciate comments on the pros and cons of each compiler.
> >
> > Best regards,
> >
> > Aaron
> >
> > --
> >
> > Aaron Greenwood
> > Systems Administrator
> > McPherson/Poulos Groups
> > University of California
> > Irvine, CA 92697
> >
> > Office: 9327 Battle Creek Street NW
> > Albuquerque, NM 87114
> > Home Tele: 505.890.8218
> > Cell: 951.818.0594
> > agreenwo.uci.edu
> > greenwood.abqnorthwest.com
> > http://crystal.bio.uci.edu/agreenwo
> >
> >
> >
> --------------------------------------------------------------
> ---------
> > The AMBER Mail Reflector
> > To post, send mail to amber.scripps.edu
> > To unsubscribe, send "unsubscribe amber" to majordomo.scripps.edu
> --------------------------------------------------------------
> ---------
> The AMBER Mail Reflector
> To post, send mail to amber.scripps.edu
> To unsubscribe, send "unsubscribe amber" to majordomo.scripps.edu
>


-----------------------------------------------------------------------
The AMBER Mail Reflector
To post, send mail to amber.scripps.edu
To unsubscribe, send "unsubscribe amber" to majordomo.scripps.edu
Received on Wed Oct 24 2007 - 06:07:50 PDT
Custom Search