--- Comment #19 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-08-08 16:21
---
Note that after a GCC version is released fixes for runtime regressions are
usually not considered because of their impact on stability (which is the
most important point). Instead if you care for performance of a
--- Comment #18 from t dot artem at mailcity dot com 2009-08-08 14:14
---
(In reply to comment #16)
>
> This is not a simple testcase. A simple testcase is a sufficiently small
> self-contained compilable code that shows the problem in a way that can be
> reliably and consistently repr
--- Comment #17 from jhopper at safe-mail dot net 2009-07-30 23:58 ---
you can find a nicer version of results (and potentially future updates) here:
http://anonym.to?http://manoa.flnet.org/linux/compilers.html
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35671
--- Comment #16 from manu at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-07-30 12:02 ---
(In reply to comment #8)
> If anyone cares to repeat my test results, here's a simple test case:
This is not a simple testcase. A simple testcase is a sufficiently small
self-contained compilable code that shows the p
--- Comment #15 from jhopper at safe-mail dot net 2009-07-30 06:37 ---
btw, these results also show something else of interest: pgo degrades
performance
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35671
--- Comment #14 from jhopper at safe-mail dot net 2009-07-30 05:09 ---
one more thing to mention about gcc, is the configurations during their
compilation: (although it may not have much sense as those things were never
really having an effect to the anticipated extent)
../gcc-4.a.b/con
--- Comment #13 from jhopper at safe-mail dot net 2009-07-30 04:39 ---
one last thing: and try not to take the LU DECOMPOSITION test seriously between
the various gcc testing runs, there was great difference even when using the
same executable several times, except of corse for the huge
--- Comment #12 from jhopper at safe-mail dot net 2009-07-30 04:34 ---
one more note about executable size in memory:
while there was no difference in sizes in memory for all gcc versions
for icc versions there was a great difference:
VERSION VIRTRSS
gcc (all) ~2000kb 500kb
ic
--- Comment #11 from jhopper at safe-mail dot net 2009-07-30 04:24 ---
forgot to mention executable sizes:
all tested gcc versions 4.2 4.3 and 4.4 were 100kb, intel executables were 68
and 72 kb respectively (version 10, 11).
executable size in memory (both VIRT and RSS) did not change
--- Comment #10 from jhopper at safe-mail dot net 2009-07-30 04:16 ---
abit more comprehensive gcc 4.2.4 vs 4.3.3 vs 4.4.0 vs 4.4.1 comparison using
nbench:
hardware: Intel celron 320 (prescott, SSE3, 256KB L2, socket 478) @ 2970 mhz
kernel: specially optimized by intel compiler 10 (lin
--- Comment #9 from t dot artem at mailcity dot com 2009-07-07 18:45
---
Qt 4.5.2 /lib directory (without *.debug files) occupies
GCC 4.2.4: 43,649,379 bytes in 107 files
GCC 4.4.0: 46,544,895 bytes in 107 files
I don't like it at all. Compilation flags are still the same: -march=pent
--- Comment #8 from t dot artem at mailcity dot com 2009-04-19 13:51
---
If anyone cares to repeat my test results, here's a simple test case:
1) Obtain a large enough collection of WAV files (however I'm sure all other
compressible material will also fit this test). If you have wine e
--- Comment #7 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-04-18 10:01 ---
For better speed with -march=pentium2 you should add -mtune=generic which
will use only pentium2 features but tunes the code to not pessimize newer
processors.
That said, without a testcase and maybe some analysis (
--- Comment #6 from t dot artem at mailcity dot com 2009-04-18 08:18
---
Many Linux distros compile binaries for a common lowest denominator so that you
could run a distro on very old computers and CPUs - their developers in most
cases choose -march=i686 or -march=i586.
I compile binar
--- Comment #5 from hjl dot tools at gmail dot com 2009-04-18 02:24 ---
(In reply to comment #4)
> Test configuration:
>
> Software: Linux kernel 2.6.28.9 x86, GCC 4.2.4, GCC 4.4.0 RC,
> http://www.rarlab.com/rar/unrarsrc-3.8.5.tar.gz
>
> Hardware: AMD64 Dual Core CPU 5600, 1MB x 2 lev
--- Comment #4 from t dot artem at mailcity dot com 2009-04-18 01:44
---
Test configuration:
Software: Linux kernel 2.6.28.9 x86, GCC 4.2.4, GCC 4.4.0 RC,
http://www.rarlab.com/rar/unrarsrc-3.8.5.tar.gz
Hardware: AMD64 Dual Core CPU 5600, 1MB x 2 level 2 cache
RAM: DDR2 800MHz 4GB
un
16 matches
Mail list logo
