|
|
|
|
|
|
by dr_zoidberg
1216 days ago
|
|
|
One other thing. The article states pythons performance at keys-per-second, then all the other numbers are given in keys-per-minute. That means that pythons number looks really small in comparison, but if we take it (500 kps) and multiply it by 60, we get 30k keys-per-minute, or about 50% faster than the first CUDA baseline. Now I'm quite fond of python, but largely I read this as the CUDA implementation having quite some room for improvement. Having almost no CUDA experience of my own, that is just a hunch, which I'm glad rfoo supports with (surely) a lot more experience than me. |
|
|