aboutsummaryrefslogtreecommitdiffhomepage
diff options
context:
space:
mode:
authorAndrzej Janik <[email protected]>2020-11-23 22:37:57 +0100
committerAndrzej Janik <[email protected]>2020-11-23 22:38:12 +0100
commit892e47a653a8a3f0874cda194c7c31948957c97d (patch)
tree1644228696228accf2b3cb500711fbb962e7016e
parent690f4f3ad2e1daf255749aa65ba14996ada51bbf (diff)
downloadZLUDA-1.tar.gz
ZLUDA-1.zip
Update README with links to GeekBench resultsv1
-rw-r--r--README.md8
1 files changed, 6 insertions, 2 deletions
diff --git a/README.md b/README.md
index 4a90b96..181a71f 100644
--- a/README.md
+++ b/README.md
@@ -9,9 +9,13 @@ One measurement has been done using OpenCL and another measurement has been done
Performance below is normalized to OpenCL performance. 110% means that ZLUDA-implemented CUDA is 10% faster on Intel UHD 630.
-![](GeekBench_5_2_3.svg)
+![Performance graph](GeekBench_5_2_3.svg)
-Overall in this suite of benchmarks ZLUDA is roughly 4% faster.
+[ZLUDA detailed log on Geekbench.com](https://browser.geekbench.com/v5/compute/1918048)
+
+[OpenCL detailed log on Geekbench.com](https://browser.geekbench.com/v5/compute/1918080)
+
+Overall in this suite of benchmarks faster by approximately 4% on ZLUDA.
### Explanation of the results
* Why is ZLUDA faster in Stereo Matching, Gaussian Blur and Depth of Field?\