You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Copy file name to clipboardExpand all lines: README.md
+1Lines changed: 1 addition & 0 deletions
Display the source diff
Display the rich diff
Original file line number
Diff line number
Diff line change
@@ -57,6 +57,7 @@ Benchmarks represent some real life numerical problem or some important part (ke
57
57
-`numba-dpex @dpjit` array-style: Modified `numba @njit` array-style implementation to compile and run on a specific device. You can use vanilla Numba implementation as a baseline while comparing `numba-dpex` implementation details and performance. You can also compare it against `dpnp` implementation to see how much extra performance `numba-dpex` can bring when you compile NumPy code for a given device
58
58
-`numba-dpex @dpjit` direct loops (`prange`): Modified `numba @njit` direct loop implementation to compile and run on a specific device. You can use vanilla Numba implementation as a baseline while comparing `numba-dpex` implementation details and performance. You can also compare it against `dpnp` implementation to see how much extra performance `numba-dpex` can bring when you compile NumPy code for a given device
59
59
-`numba-dpex @dpjit` kernel: Kernel-style programming, which is close to `@cuda.jit` programming model used in vanilla Numba
60
+
-`numba-mlir`: Array-style, direct loops and kernel-style implementations for experimental MLIR-based backend for Numba
60
61
-`cupy`: NumPy-like implementation using CuPy to run on CUDA-compatible devices
61
62
-`@cuda.jit`: Kernel-style Numba implementation to run on CUDA-compatible devices
62
63
- Native SYCL: Most applications/kernels also have DPC++ implementation, which can be used to compare performance of above implementations to DPC++ compiled code.
0 commit comments