From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 15408 invoked by alias); 1 Jul 2005 02:02:00 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 15331 invoked by uid 22791); 1 Jul 2005 02:01:46 -0000 Received: from h-68-164-203-246.nycmny83.covad.net (HELO dberlin.org) (68.164.203.246) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.30-dev) with ESMTP; Fri, 01 Jul 2005 02:01:46 +0000 Received: from [127.0.0.1] (HELO localhost) by dberlin.org (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.3.4) with ESMTP id 8186452; Thu, 30 Jun 2005 22:01:45 -0400 Subject: Re: Pro64-based GPLed compiler From: Daniel Berlin To: James E Wilson Cc: Vladimir Makarov , Marc Gonzalez-Sigler , gcc@gcc.gnu.org In-Reply-To: <42C48B98.5060706@specifixinc.com> References: <42C2C231.6040508@inria.fr> <42C2E1DD.9090508@redhat.com> <1120094349.8950.15.camel@linux-009002219098> <42C4683C.3080909@specifixinc.com> <42C470EB.7000506@redhat.com> <42C48B98.5060706@specifixinc.com> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Fri, 01 Jul 2005 02:02:00 -0000 Message-Id: <1120183311.17986.7.camel@linux-009002243055> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2005-07/txt/msg00014.txt.bz2 On Thu, 2005-06-30 at 17:17 -0700, James E Wilson wrote: > Vladimir Makarov wrote: > > I just hope results > > for 64-bit mode, amd machine, or SPECFP2000 are better. > > Their web pages primarily talk about the 64-bit performance on AMD > systems. Maybe they aren't well tuned for 32-bit performance and/or > Intel parts. Anyways, from what Daniel Berlin mentioned, it may be that > the tree-ssa stuff in gcc4.x has negated much of their earlier advantage. I would not be surprised if they kick the crap out of us when it comes to numerical fortran or something, but for regular c code, i'd not expect more than 10-20% difference, max.