Re: Solaris x86 version of Matlab  Solaris
This is a discussion on Re: Solaris x86 version of Matlab  Solaris ; Gulleiot Ulleiot wrote:
> I'm interested in a version of Matlab for Solaris x86. I see
> a lot of talk about this recently, and would like to add my
> voice to those wanting it.
>
> Wolfram Resarch ...

Re: Solaris x86 version of Matlab
Gulleiot Ulleiot wrote:
> I'm interested in a version of Matlab for Solaris x86. I see
> a lot of talk about this recently, and would like to add my
> voice to those wanting it.
>
> Wolfram Resarch have done this for Mathematica, and given
> Mathworks have versions for both Solaris (SPARC) and Linux,
> producing an x86 port should be easy. Any Solaris specific
> code should simply recompile. Any x86 assmebler should move
> from Linux quite easily. A port should not be too hard.
>
>
You should have perhaps copied that to the Solaris newsgroups  there
has been some discussion about Matlab on Solaris recently there. I took
the liberty of sending this to a couple of Solaris newsgroups.
I suggested to the other person wanting Matlab on Solaris x86 that they
consider using Mathematica, since that does exist for Solaris x86.
Actually, Mathematica on Solaris needs an AMD 64bit CPU. Clearly
Wolfram Research have decided 32bit is not worth worrying with.
Personally I find that requirement for 64bit AMD CPUs a bit annoying,
as it means it can't be used on many laptops. As far as I know, all the
AMD 64bit CPUs, including the mobile ones, are a lot more power hungry
than their Intel equivalents. But judging by some benchmarks I have
seen, Mathematica seems to run very well on Solaris x86 (or is it
Solaris x64?). But it does need a 64bit AMD CPU.
As you say, a port of Matlab should be quite easy, so if Mathworks will
not do it, consider some similar(ish) software that will.

Re: Solaris x86 version of Matlab
Andrew Gabriel wrote:
>> Actually, Mathematica on Solaris needs an AMD 64bit CPU. Clearly
>
> I presume it's OK on Intel 64bit x86 CPU too, as it was
> a Sun Ultra 24 Workstation running Solaris 10 x64 which
> held the Mathematica performance record.
>
Em, you have a point there.
But
http://www.wolfram.com/products/mathematica/platforms/
says:
Sun x86
Solaris 10 64bit
Requires AMD 64bit machine.
>> Wolfram Research have decided 32bit is not worth worrying with.
>
>> As you say, a port of Matlab should be quite easy, so if Mathworks will
>> not do it, consider some similar(ish) software that will.
>
> It's surprising if Mathworks won't do it, as they're likely
> missing out on meeting their top performance results, if
> Mathematica is anything to go by.
>
Yes, very good point.

Re: Solaris x86 version of Matlab
Dave wrote:
> Gulleiot Ulleiot wrote:
>
>> I'm interested in a version of Matlab for Solaris x86. I see
>> a lot of talk about this recently, and would like to add my
>> voice to those wanting it.
>> Wolfram Resarch have done this for Mathematica, and given
>> Mathworks have versions for both Solaris (SPARC) and Linux,
>> producing an x86 port should be easy. Any Solaris specific
>> code should simply recompile. Any x86 assmebler should move
>> from Linux quite easily. A port should not be too hard.
>>
>>
>
> You should have perhaps copied that to the Solaris newsgroups  there
> has been some discussion about Matlab on Solaris recently there. I took
> the liberty of sending this to a couple of Solaris newsgroups.
>
> I suggested to the other person wanting Matlab on Solaris x86 that they
> consider using Mathematica, since that does exist for Solaris x86.
>
> Actually, Mathematica on Solaris needs an AMD 64bit CPU. Clearly
> Wolfram Research have decided 32bit is not worth worrying with.
>
> Personally I find that requirement for 64bit AMD CPUs a bit annoying,
> as it means it can't be used on many laptops. As far as I know, all the
> AMD 64bit CPUs, including the mobile ones, are a lot more power hungry
> than their Intel equivalents. But judging by some benchmarks I have
> seen, Mathematica seems to run very well on Solaris x86 (or is it
> Solaris x64?). But it does need a 64bit AMD CPU.
>
> As you say, a port of Matlab should be quite easy, so if Mathworks will
> not do it, consider some similar(ish) software that will.
>
ISTR that there is an open source version of Matlab. Many years ago I
got a copy from an AT&T website. I also recall that it's written in
Fortran so you'll need a Fortran compiler.
If you want the very latest and greatest with support, you'll have to
pay for it. I used the free version because I was on a zero budget.
The commercial version is maintained and supported. The free version,
needless to say, is not!

Re: Solaris x86 version of Matlab
Richard B. Gilbert wrote:
> ISTR that there is an open source version of Matlab. Many years ago I
> got a copy from an AT&T website. I also recall that it's written in
> Fortran so you'll need a Fortran compiler.
>
> If you want the very latest and greatest with support, you'll have to
> pay for it. I used the free version because I was on a zero budget.
> The commercial version is maintained and supported. The free version,
> needless to say, is not!
>
There are a few.
http://www.dspguru.com/sw/opendsp/mathclo2.htm
Someone recently told me Octave was very good. What with that, and
seeing someone post a question about a problem building Octave on
Solaris x86, I decided to give the compile a try on SPARC. But it bombs
out as soon as I try to run gmake
I'm expecting to be sent some matlab files soon. I'll probably try to
convert them to Mathematica.

Re: Solaris x86 version of Matlab
Andrew Gabriel wrote:
> In article <473f3c3a@212.67.96.135>,
> Dave writes:
>> Andrew Gabriel wrote:
>>> In article <473efd1f@212.67.96.135>,
>>> Dave writes:
>>>> Actually, Mathematica on Solaris needs an AMD 64bit CPU. Clearly
>>> I presume it's OK on Intel 64bit x86 CPU too, as it was
>>> a Sun Ultra 24 Workstation running Solaris 10 x64 which
>>> held the Mathematica performance record.
>> Em, you have a point there.
>>
>> But
>>
>> http://www.wolfram.com/products/mathematica/platforms/
>> says:
>>
>> Sun x86
>> Solaris 10 64bit
>> Requires AMD 64bit machine.
>
> Intel has been supporting most of the AMD64 instruction set
> for a good while now, although there are some specialised
> instructions they have their own versions of  don't know
> if Mathematica goes near those, but most likely it just
> wants the base 64bit instruction set which Intel copies.
I did a bit more digging ...
It looks like that record on the Sun Ultra 45 was set on Suse Linux, not
Solaris x86.
http://www.sun.com/desktop/workstati...nchmarks.jsp#1
http://blogs.sun.com/bmseer/entry/ma..._world_records
I assume if it was set on Solaris, Sun would be promoting that more than
setting the record on Suse.
Anyone ever tried Mathematica 6 on an Intel based Solaris x86 system?

Re: Solaris x86 version of Matlab
Andrew Gabriel wrote:
>> I did a bit more digging ...
>>
>> It looks like that record on the Sun Ultra 45 was set on Suse Linux, not
>> Solaris x86.
>>
>> http://www.sun.com/desktop/workstati...nchmarks.jsp#1
>> http://blogs.sun.com/bmseer/entry/ma..._world_records
>
> I was thinking of this one, but it's AMD64:
> http://www.sun.com/desktop/workstati...nchmarks.jsp#2
> http://www.sun.com/customers/software/wolfram.xml
>
Yes, as you say, an AMD chip.
It would be interesting to know if it does in practice run on Intel
chips, since you say Intel support most of the AMD instructions. I don't
have a 64bit intel chip myself, so are unable to test it. But if anyone
does, they can get a month demo of Mathematica for any platform,
including Solaris x86.
If Mathematica really does need an AMD chip, I wonder how much Wolfram
gain from using an AMD specific instructions? It would have to be quite
a bit for them to ignore the Intel users. I've no idea how many Intel
64bit Solaris boxes exist compared to AMD 64bit Solaris x86 ones, but
given Intel is a lot bigger than AMD, I assume that means there are more
Intel ones.

Re: Solaris x86 version of Matlab
* Dave:
> Personally I find that requirement for 64bit AMD CPUs a bit annoying,
> as it means it can't be used on many laptops.
It can. Mathematica doesn't require an "AMD 64bit CPU" but an "AMD64
CPU". The difference is that the first one means the CPU must be made by
AMD, the second one just refers to AMD64compatible CPUs (aka "x64" aka
"EM64T" aka "intel64").
Mathematica runs on all CPUs that use the AMD64/x64/EM64T/intel64
extensions, that means besides AMD Athlon/Opteron/Phenom it also runs on
intel P4 (with EM64T)/XEON (with EM64T/intel64)/Core2.
> As far as I know, all the
> AMD 64bit CPUs, including the mobile ones, are a lot more power hungry
> than their Intel equivalents.
Well, the difference between AMD Turion and intel Core2 Mobile is quite
small and the power consumption around(!) the same.
Benjamin

Re: Solaris x86 version of Matlab
Benjamin Gawert wrote:
> Mathematica runs on all CPUs that use the AMD64/x64/EM64T/intel64
> extensions, that means besides AMD Athlon/Opteron/Phenom it also runs on
> intel P4 (with EM64T)/XEON (with EM64T/intel64)/Core2.
It needs the AMD_3DNOW extension, which my laptop (Intel Core 2 Duo
T7200 2.0 GHz) does not support.

Re: Solaris x86 version of Matlab
Dave wrote:
> Andrew Gabriel wrote:
>
>
>>> I did a bit more digging ...
>>>
>>> It looks like that record on the Sun Ultra 45 was set on Suse Linux,
>>> not Solaris x86.
>>>
>>> http://www.sun.com/desktop/workstati...nchmarks.jsp#1
>>> http://blogs.sun.com/bmseer/entry/ma..._world_records
>>
>> I was thinking of this one, but it's AMD64:
>> http://www.sun.com/desktop/workstati...nchmarks.jsp#2
>> http://www.sun.com/customers/software/wolfram.xml
>>
>
> Yes, as you say, an AMD chip.
>
> It would be interesting to know if it does in practice run on Intel
> chips, since you say Intel support most of the AMD instructions. I don't
> have a 64bit intel chip myself, so are unable to test it. But if anyone
> does, they can get a month demo of Mathematica for any platform,
> including Solaris x86.
>
> If Mathematica really does need an AMD chip, I wonder how much Wolfram
> gain from using an AMD specific instructions? It would have to be quite
> a bit for them to ignore the Intel users. I've no idea how many Intel
> 64bit Solaris boxes exist compared to AMD 64bit Solaris x86 ones, but
> given Intel is a lot bigger than AMD, I assume that means there are more
> Intel ones.
Well, I was bored, you see, and I have a S10 system on an Intel P4, and,
well, I was intrigued...
The install fails:
ld.so.1: MathKernel: fatal:
/opt/local/Wolfram/Mathematica/6.0/SystemFiles/Libraries/Solarisx8664/libsunperf.so.1:
hardware capability unsupported: 0x100 [ AMD_3DNow ]
Cheers,
Gary B)

__________________________________________________ ____________________________
Armful of chairs: Something some people would not know
whether you were up them with or not
 Barry Humphries

Re: Solaris x86 version of Matlab
Gary R. Schmidt wrote:
> Well, I was bored, you see, and I have a S10 system on an Intel P4, and,
> well, I was intrigued...
>
> The install fails:
> ld.so.1: MathKernel: fatal:
> /opt/local/Wolfram/Mathematica/6.0/SystemFiles/Libraries/Solarisx8664/libsunperf.so.1:
> hardware capability unsupported: 0x100 [ AMD_3DNow ]
>
> Cheers,
> Gary B)
>
Yes, I got exactly the same after installing Solaris 10 on my laptop 
which I only done last night. I hate to think why the Mathematica kernel
needs 3D instructions.

Re: Solaris x86 version of Matlab
"Gary R. Schmidt" writes:
>Well, I was bored, you see, and I have a S10 system on an Intel P4, and,
>well, I was intrigued...
>The install fails:
>ld.so.1: MathKernel: fatal:
>/opt/local/Wolfram/Mathematica/6.0/SystemFiles/Libraries/Solarisx8664/libsunperf.so.1:
>hardware capability unsupported: 0x100 [ AMD_3DNow ]
I just had a look at the libsunperf.so that comes with Sun Studio 11 and 12:
Studio 11:
amd64/libsunperf.so.1: ELF 64bit LSB dynamic lib AMD64 Version 1 [SSE2 SSE AMD_3DNow CMOV FPU], dynamically linked, not stripped, no debugging information available
sse2/libsunperf.so.2: ELF 32bit LSB dynamic lib 80386 Version 1 [SSE2 SSE MMX CMOV FPU], dynamically linked, not stripped, no debugging information available
Studio 12:
amd64/libsunperf.so.2: ELF 64bit LSB dynamic lib AMD64 Version 1 [SSE2 SSE CMOV FPU], dynamically linked, not stripped, no debugging information available
sse2/libsunperf.so.3: ELF 32bit LSB dynamic lib 80386 Version 1 [SSE2 SSE MMX CMOV FPU], dynamically linked, not stripped, no debugging information available
So it looks like the newer versions of libsunperf.so for amd64 are no longer compiled
with the AMD_3DNow option. So it might really be possible to just replace the one
supplied with Mathematica with a newer one.
Regards,
Matthias

+++
 Matthias Ernst  Phone: +4116324366 
 ETH Zürich, HCI D 227  Fax: +4116321621 
 Laboratorium für Physikalische Chemie  
 ETHHönggerberg  HCI D 227  Email: maer@nmr.phys.chem.ethz.ch 
 CH8093 Zürich, Switzerland  maer@scientist.com 
+++

Re: Solaris x86 version of Matlab
Matthias Ernst wrote:
> "Gary R. Schmidt" writes:
>
>> Well, I was bored, you see, and I have a S10 system on an Intel P4, and,
>> well, I was intrigued...
>
>> The install fails:
>> ld.so.1: MathKernel: fatal:
>> /opt/local/Wolfram/Mathematica/6.0/SystemFiles/Libraries/Solarisx8664/libsunperf.so.1:
>> hardware capability unsupported: 0x100 [ AMD_3DNow ]
>
> I just had a look at the libsunperf.so that comes with Sun Studio 11 and 12:
>
> Studio 11:
> amd64/libsunperf.so.1: ELF 64bit LSB dynamic lib AMD64 Version 1 [SSE2 SSE AMD_3DNow CMOV FPU], dynamically linked, not stripped, no debugging information available
> sse2/libsunperf.so.2: ELF 32bit LSB dynamic lib 80386 Version 1 [SSE2 SSE MMX CMOV FPU], dynamically linked, not stripped, no debugging information available
> Studio 12:
> amd64/libsunperf.so.2: ELF 64bit LSB dynamic lib AMD64 Version 1 [SSE2 SSE CMOV FPU], dynamically linked, not stripped, no debugging information available
> sse2/libsunperf.so.3: ELF 32bit LSB dynamic lib 80386 Version 1 [SSE2 SSE MMX CMOV FPU], dynamically linked, not stripped, no debugging information available
>
> So it looks like the newer versions of libsunperf.so for amd64 are no longer compiled
> with the AMD_3DNow option. So it might really be possible to just replace the one
> supplied with Mathematica with a newer one.
>
> Regards,
>
> Matthias
>
I tried, but it does not work, as then a file (libfsu.so.l) appears to
be missing. Although I have not tried much  it is possible that file is
somewhere on the disk.
I can't possibly see any justificatiofor requiring the kernel (which can
be run without any user interface) to use 3D instructions. People run
multiple kernels and one front end, and use the kernels on machines with
no display connected. It seems strange that 3D instructions would be
needed.
The file Mathematica wants is
/usr/local/Wolfram/Mathematica/6.0/SystemFiles/Libraries/Solarisx8664/libsunperf.so.1
On my system, I found /opt/SUNWspro/prod/lib/amd64/libsunperf.so.2 and
running the file command does not mention 3D_NOW:
# file /opt/SUNWspro/prod/lib/amd64/libsunperf.so.2
/opt/SUNWspro/prod/lib/amd64/libsunperf.so.2: ELF 64bit LSB dynamic
lib AMD64 Version 1 [SSE2 SSE CMOV FPU], dynamically linked, not
stripped, no debugging information available
So I created a link (after renaming the file supplied with Mathematica)
# ln s /opt/SUNWspro/prod/lib/amd64/libsunperf.so.2
/usr/local/Wolfram/Mathematica/6.0/SystemFiles/Libraries/Solarisx8664/libsunperf.so.1
Then when I try to run the program:
# /usr/local/bin/math
ld.so.1: MathKernel: fatal: libfsu.so.1: version `SUNWprivate_1.1' not
found (required by file
/usr/local/Wolfram/Mathematica/6.0/SystemFiles/Libraries/Solarisx8664/libsunperf.so.1)
ld.so.1: MathKernel: fatal: libfsu.so.1: open failed: No such file or
directory
Killed
Does anyone know the ratio of users of Solaris x86 on Intel to those on
AMD CPUs? I can't believe Intel is in the minority, so I'm baffled why
there is no support for Intel CPUs on Solaris x86, but there is AMD CPUs

Re: Solaris x86 version of Matlab
Dave wrote:
[SNIP]
>
> I tried, but it does not work, as then a file (libfsu.so.l) appears to
> be missing. Although I have not tried much  it is possible that file is
> somewhere on the disk.
>
>
> I can't possibly see any justificatiofor requiring the kernel (which can
> be run without any user interface) to use 3D instructions. People run
> multiple kernels and one front end, and use the kernels on machines with
> no display connected. It seems strange that 3D instructions would be
> needed.
>
>
> The file Mathematica wants is
>
> /usr/local/Wolfram/Mathematica/6.0/SystemFiles/Libraries/Solarisx8664/libsunperf.so.1
>
>
> On my system, I found /opt/SUNWspro/prod/lib/amd64/libsunperf.so.2 and
> running the file command does not mention 3D_NOW:
>
> # file /opt/SUNWspro/prod/lib/amd64/libsunperf.so.2
> /opt/SUNWspro/prod/lib/amd64/libsunperf.so.2: ELF 64bit LSB dynamic
> lib AMD64 Version 1 [SSE2 SSE CMOV FPU], dynamically linked, not
> stripped, no debugging information available
>
> So I created a link (after renaming the file supplied with Mathematica)
>
> # ln s /opt/SUNWspro/prod/lib/amd64/libsunperf.so.2
> /usr/local/Wolfram/Mathematica/6.0/SystemFiles/Libraries/Solarisx8664/libsunperf.so.1
>
>
> Then when I try to run the program:
>
> # /usr/local/bin/math
> ld.so.1: MathKernel: fatal: libfsu.so.1: version `SUNWprivate_1.1' not
> found (required by file
> /usr/local/Wolfram/Mathematica/6.0/SystemFiles/Libraries/Solarisx8664/libsunperf.so.1)
>
> ld.so.1: MathKernel: fatal: libfsu.so.1: open failed: No such file or
> directory
> Killed
>
Hmmm, I have Studio 12 on my system, and libfsu is in various places
under /opt/SUNWspro.
Presumably the folk at Wolfram are *so* smart that hey have to control
every little bit of what goes on. If they follow up the trial request,
I may have a bit of a dig at them.
> Does anyone know the ratio of users of Solaris x86 on Intel to those on
> AMD CPUs? I can't believe Intel is in the minority, so I'm baffled why
> there is no support for Intel CPUs on Solaris x86, but there is AMD CPUs
>
It seems a bit limiting to not have as generic a product as possiible.
I can understand being 64bit only, but this is just silly.
Perhaps all they have to do is recompile under Studio 12?
Oh, and *is* libsunperf redistributable? I don't recall reading
anything about it in Studio 11, and I don't want to assume that it is
unchanged in Studio 12.
Cheers,
Gary B)

Re: Solaris x86 version of Matlab
Dave writes:
>The file Mathematica wants is
>/usr/local/Wolfram/Mathematica/6.0/SystemFiles/Libraries/Solarisx8664/libsunperf.so.1
>On my system, I found /opt/SUNWspro/prod/lib/amd64/libsunperf.so.2 and
>running the file command does not mention 3D_NOW:
># file /opt/SUNWspro/prod/lib/amd64/libsunperf.so.2
>/opt/SUNWspro/prod/lib/amd64/libsunperf.so.2: ELF 64bit LSB dynamic
>lib AMD64 Version 1 [SSE2 SSE CMOV FPU], dynamically linked, not
>stripped, no debugging information available
>So I created a link (after renaming the file supplied with Mathematica)
># ln s /opt/SUNWspro/prod/lib/amd64/libsunperf.so.2
>/usr/local/Wolfram/Mathematica/6.0/SystemFiles/Libraries/Solarisx8664/libsunperf.so.1
>Then when I try to run the program:
># /usr/local/bin/math
>ld.so.1: MathKernel: fatal: libfsu.so.1: version `SUNWprivate_1.1' not
>found (required by file
>/usr/local/Wolfram/Mathematica/6.0/SystemFiles/Libraries/Solarisx8664/libsunperf.so.1)
>ld.so.1: MathKernel: fatal: libfsu.so.1: open failed: No such file or
>directory
>Killed
I just tried the following: From Studio 12 I copied the following libraries
into the Mathematica library directory after moving the ones supplied by
Mathematica to a save place:
libsunperf.so.2
libsunmath.so.1
libfsu.so.1
libfui.so.2
I then renamed libsunperf.so.2 to libsunperf.so.1 und Mathematica starts up
on an AMD machine without any libraries that have the 3DNow option set. I
don't have an Intel machine yet, so I cannot test whether it runs on Intel
or not but guessing from the libraries it should.
Regards,
Matthias

+++
 Matthias Ernst  Phone: +4116324366 
 ETH Zürich, HCI D 227  Fax: +4116321621 
 Laboratorium für Physikalische Chemie  
 ETHHönggerberg  HCI D 227  Email: maer@nmr.phys.chem.ethz.ch 
 CH8093 Zürich, Switzerland  maer@scientist.com 
+++

Re: Solaris x86 version of Matlab
On 20071121 20:44:45 +0000, Dave said:
> I can't possibly see any justificatiofor requiring the kernel (which
> can be run without any user interface) to use 3D instructions. People
> run multiple kernels and one front end, and use the kernels on machines
> with no display connected. It seems strange that 3D instructions would
> be needed.
They're not. The AMD "3DNow!" instructions are just SIMD extensions
with a stupid marketing name. Sort of like MMX and SSE.
> Does anyone know the ratio of users of Solaris x86 on Intel to those on
> AMD CPUs? I can't believe Intel is in the minority, so I'm baffled why
> there is no support for Intel CPUs on Solaris x86, but there is AMD CPUs
That's an interesting question. During the Dell announcement Schwartz
said something about a large proportion of Solaris 10 x86 installs
being on Dell boxes, and since Dells are all Intel...
Cheers,
Chris

Re: Solaris x86 version of Matlab
* Dave:
> It needs the AMD_3DNOW extension, which my laptop (Intel Core 2 Duo
> T7200 2.0 GHz) does not support.
I remember to read somewhere that it also runs without 3DNow, but I'm
not sure when and where it was.
I sent an inquiry to Wolfram, let's see what they say.
Benjamin

Re: Solaris x86 version of Matlab
Benjamin Gawert wrote:
> * Dave:
>
>> It needs the AMD_3DNOW extension, which my laptop (Intel Core 2 Duo
>> T7200 2.0 GHz) does not support.
>
> I remember to read somewhere that it also runs without 3DNow, but I'm
> not sure when and where it was.
>
> I sent an inquiry to Wolfram, let's see what they say.
>
> Benjamin
I've got the kernel running, by changing a couple of library files. I
only seem to need to
1) Move libsunperf.so.1 to libsunperf.so.1
2) Set up a couple of links in the directory:
/usr/local/Wolfram/Mathematica/6.0/SystemFiles/Libraries/Solarisx8664
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 40 Nov 22 19:29 libfsu.so.1 >
/opt/SUNWspro/prod/lib/amd64/libfsu.so.1
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 44 Nov 21 20:32 libsunperf.so.1 >
/opt/SUNWspro/prod/lib/amd64/libsunperf.so.2
bash3.00$ pwd
/usr/local/Wolfram/Mathematica/6.0/SystemFiles/Libraries/Solarisx8664
But the front end is not being quite so nice. It crashes, but no obvious
reason why.
I'm not sure why Matthias changed other files  they don't seem to have
this AMD_3DNOW issue, but perhaps he knows something I don't, as the
front end it not working.
FWIW, Mathematica 6.0.0 scores 1.392 on the builtin benchmark, but
6.0.1 scores 2.00 under Vista, so is much quicker under Vista, but I'd
rather use it under Solaris! (Either that or 6.0.1 is much quicker than
6, which I doubt).
# /usr/local/bin/math
Mathematica 6.0 for Sun Solaris x86 (64bit)
Copyright 19882007 Wolfram Research, Inc.
In[1]:= Needs["Benchmarking`"];
In[2]:= Benchmark[]
Test 1 of 15: Data Fitting ...
Test 2 of 15: Digits of Pi ...
Test 3 of 15: Discrete Fourier Transform ...
Test 4 of 15: Eigenvalues of a Matrix ...
Test 5 of 15: Elementary Functions ...
Test 6 of 15: Gamma Function ...
Test 7 of 15: Large Integer Multiplication ...
Test 8 of 15: Matrix Arithmetic ...
Test 9 of 15: Matrix Multiplication ...
Test 10 of 15: Matrix Transpose ...
Test 11 of 15: Numerical Integration ...
Test 12 of 15: Polynomial Expansion ...
Test 13 of 15: Random Number Sort ...
Test 14 of 15: Singular Value Decomposition ...
Test 15 of 15: Solving a Linear System ...
Out[2]//InputForm=
{"MachineName" > "kingfisher", "System" > "Sun Solaris x86 (64bit)",
"BenchmarkName" > "MathematicaMark6", "FullVersionNumber" > "6.0.0",
"Date" > "November 22, 2007", "BenchmarkResult" > 1.392,
"TotalTime" > 61.9, "Results" > {{"Data Fitting", 2.509},
{"Digits of Pi", 0.878}, {"Discrete Fourier Transform", 2.319},
{"Eigenvalues of a Matrix", 10.737}, {"Elementary Functions", 11.44},
{"Gamma Function", 0.704}, {"Large Integer Multiplication", 1.406},
{"Matrix Arithmetic", 7.259}, {"Matrix Multiplication", 4.139},
{"Matrix Transpose", 2.078}, {"Numerical Integration", 3.553},
{"Polynomial Expansion", 1.968}, {"Random Number Sort", 4.62},
{"Singular Value Decomposition", 4.148}, {"Solving a Linear System",
4.142}}}

Re: Solaris x86 version of Matlab
Dave wrote:
>
> I've got the kernel running, by changing a couple of library files. I
> only seem to need to
>
>
> 1) Move libsunperf.so.1 to libsunperf.so.1
Oops, move it to libsunperf.so.1.orig (i.e take a backup)

Re: Solaris x86 version of Matlab
Matthias Ernst wrote:
> Killed
>
> I just tried the following: From Studio 12 I copied the following libraries
> into the Mathematica library directory after moving the ones supplied by
> Mathematica to a save place:
> libsunperf.so.2
> libsunmath.so.1
> libfsu.so.1
> libfui.so.2
> I then renamed libsunperf.so.2 to libsunperf.so.1 und Mathematica starts up
> on an AMD machine without any libraries that have the 3DNow option set. I
> don't have an Intel machine yet, so I cannot test whether it runs on Intel
> or not but guessing from the libraries it should.
>
> Regards,
>
> Matthias
>
What made you choose those files? All I can see is that the original
libsunperf.so.1 had the AMD_3DNow issue. I don't see it with
libsunmath.so.1 for example.
bash3.00$ file *  grep 3D
libsunperf.so.1.orig: ELF 64bit LSB dynamic lib AMD64 Version 1 [SSE2
SSE AMD_3DNow CMOV FPU], dynamically linked, not stripped, no debugging
information available
But the front end it not working, but the kernel is.
bash3.00$ /usr/local/bin/math
Mathematica 6.0 for Sun Solaris x86 (64bit)
Copyright 19882007 Wolfram Research, Inc.
In[1]:= 100!
Out[1]=
93326215443944152681699238856266700490715968264381 6214685929638952175\
>
99993229915608941463976156518286253697920827223758 2511852109168640000000\
> 00000000000000000

Re: Solaris x86 version of Matlab
Dave wrote:
> Benjamin Gawert wrote:
>> * Dave:
>>
>>> It needs the AMD_3DNOW extension, which my laptop (Intel Core 2 Duo
>>> T7200 2.0 GHz) does not support.
>>
>> I remember to read somewhere that it also runs without 3DNow, but I'm
>> not sure when and where it was.
>>
>> I sent an inquiry to Wolfram, let's see what they say.
>>
>> Benjamin
>
>
> I've got the kernel running, by changing a couple of library files. I
> only seem to need to
I've now got it working completely. I decided to start this on another
thread, and copy to sci.math.symbolic, but leave off the Matlab one.
There's probably some point on it going on
comp.softsys.math.mathematica too, but I get fed up with the moderation
on that
See the new thread: "A hack to run Mathematica 6 on Solaris x86 with an
Intel CPU"