From: "Kaveh R. Ghazi" <ghazi@caip.rutgers.edu>
To: coyote@coyotegulch.com
Cc: gcc@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: Re: Comparing Linux C and C++ Compilers: Benchmarks and Analysis
Date: Sun, 19 Sep 2004 11:38:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <200409190008.i8J08lBj011651@caip.rutgers.edu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <414C6C0E.3070503@coyotegulch.com>
> I've posted a comparison of recent GCC versions (3.3, 3.4, and the
> coming 4.0) with Intel C++ 8.1, including several benchmarks and
> "state-of-the-product" reviews. You can find the article at:
>
> http://www.coyotegulch.com/reviews/linux_compilers/
Were you able to figure out the discrepancies posted here?
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2004-08/msg00901.html
Also:
"Performance on alma was dramatically improved by disabling the inline
mathematical functions (sin, cos) in glibc, and replacing them with
inline code generated directly by GCC. This is how the Intel compiler
operates at higher optimization levels; while GCC has not quite
reached the performance of its commercial competitor, results on
these benchmarks suggest that the new "tree-ssa" architecture holds
great promise for improved code generation."
It's not clear from this whether the numbers you posted include
disabling the math functions or not.
(I really need to get access to an x86-linux box again.)
--Kaveh
--
Kaveh R. Ghazi ghazi@caip.rutgers.edu
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2004-09-19 0:08 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2004-09-18 18:26 Scott Robert Ladd
2004-09-18 18:37 ` Richard Guenther
2004-09-18 20:42 ` Scott Robert Ladd
2004-09-19 14:55 ` Jeremy Sanders
2004-09-20 20:44 ` Devang Patel
2004-09-18 21:35 ` Andi Kleen
2004-09-18 23:19 ` Scott Robert Ladd
2004-09-18 23:46 ` Natros
2004-09-19 0:08 ` Scott Robert Ladd
2004-09-19 11:38 ` Kaveh R. Ghazi [this message]
2004-09-19 11:50 ` Scott Robert Ladd
2004-09-20 13:51 ` Kaveh R. Ghazi
2004-09-20 14:56 ` Scott Robert Ladd
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=200409190008.i8J08lBj011651@caip.rutgers.edu \
--to=ghazi@caip.rutgers.edu \
--cc=coyote@coyotegulch.com \
--cc=gcc@gcc.gnu.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).