Alexander Leidinger wrote:
Alexander Leidinger wrote:
If someone would get icc 11.x up and runnig as a port (similar to
what we have for outdated icc version in the ports collection), I
would have a look if my contact at Intel is still working there in a
position which allows him to get a commercial license for us.
A while ago it was stated by MySQL AB, that their dbms performs about
20% better when compiled with icc instead of gcc. Is this (still) true?
This looks overly simplified. "It runs better on CPU X with benchmark Y
on Mainboard Z when you use gcc A.B.C with options D and compare it to
icc E.F.G with options H." is something you can use in such cases, but
it doesn't tell you if it will be the case on your machines with your
workload.
If you want to know if it is faster on your machines with your workload,
then there is only one way to find it out: try it (be warned, due to the
amount of optimization options available in gcc/icc, something like this
will take a lot of time, as there are a lot of combinations to try).
Sounds reasonable. But doesn't that mean, that there is no need to (take
the hassle to) support icc in the future? Especially while folks are
being keen on abandon gcc for clang?
Cheers
vt
--
Volker T. Mueller
Continum AG
Bismarckallee 7d
79098 Freiburg i. Br.
Tel. +49 761 21711171
Fax. +49 761 21711198
http://www.continum.net
Sitz der Gesellschaft: Freiburg im Breisgau
Registergericht: Amtsgericht Freiburg, HRB 6866
Vorstand: Rolf Mathis, Volker T. Mueller
Vorsitzender d. Aufsichtsrats: Prof. Dr. Karl-F. Fischbach
_______________________________________________
freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
