Re: Performance measurements

[Aubert Pierre <paubert@laninsa.insa-lyon.fr>]

Martin Kahlert <martin.kahlert@mchp.siemens.de> writes:

> Hi,
> i tried to compare different compilers on my numerical code.
> Therefore i extracted a FPU intensive function and surrounded
> it with a loop while measuring the execution time.
> 
> I will provide the source and the Makefile at the end of this mail.
> 
> I work on a Linux 2.0.34 SMP Kernel (libc5). My hardware is a
> dual Pentium Pro 200MHz system with 128MB RAM.
> 
> pgcc is the portland group compiler and 
> tcc the free Tendra compiler system
> (from http://alph.dera.gov.uk/TenDRA/ )
> 
> Here are my results:
> %> make
> pgcc:
> 90.11 MFLOPS
> gcc-2.7.2.1:
> 95.46 MFLOPS
> gcc-without double align:
> 23.52 MFLOPS
> egcs-2.91.42:
> 69.96 MFLOPS
> tcc:
> 92.33 MFLOPS

Just for information, on HP

PA7200: gcc-2.7.2.2              -O3  :  26.63 MFLOPS
PA7200: egcs-2.91.42             -O3  :  47.13 MFLOPS
PA7200: cc                   -Ae +O4  :  52.88 MFLOPS

PA8000: gcc-2.7.2.2              -O3  : 108.31 MFLOPS
PA8000: egcs-2.91.42             -O3  :  97.10 MFLOPS
PA8000: cc            +DA1.1 -Ae +O4  : 129.47 MFLOPS 
PA8000: cc            +DA2.0 -Ae +O4  : 216.62 MFLOPS

egcs faster on PA8000 and slower on PA7200 than gcc-2.7.2.
cc is faster du to a better support of special instructions.

Is there a planed support for PA2.0 on HP?