This is the mail archive of the mailing list for the GNU Fortran project.

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Polyhedron Fortran benchmark - compiler comparison: Good results for GCC 4.6

Hello all,

given the optimization work which has gone into 4.6, I thought I would run the Polyhedron Fortran test suite. The system is
- Intel Core2 Duo CPU E8400 @ 3.00GHz
- CentOS release 5.5 (Final) [x86-64]

Tested compilers:
- GCC 4.6 (recent nightly build)
- Intel Fortran compiler (ifort) 11.1
- PathScale compiler (pathf95) 3.2.99
- Portland Group compiler (pgf90) 10.1

In case of GCC, I have two 'normal' compilations (gfortran64 and gfortranIMF2) and two using -flto -fwhole-program (gfortranLTO and gfortranIMF). Additionally, for gfortranIMF and gfortranIMF, LD_PRELOAD is used to preload Intel's libimf library, which replaces some libm functions.

Result in a nutshell:
- On geometric average, all compilers do not differ much - for single benchmarks, the difference can be rather large. On geometric means maximal difference is 10%

- GCC (using LTO and GLIBC's libm), ifort and pathf95's performance is almost the same (< 1.5% difference) - pgi is about 6% slower.
- Using Intel's libimf, GCC is (on geometric mean) the fastest compiler (3% faster than ifort and pathf95), without it is the slowest of the three (by <1.5%)

The results are up at

Regarding the slow down of rnflow due to LTO, cf. PR
Regarding the gas_dyn slowness, cf. PR 31067

Thanks to all who made it possible!


PS: I really miss a GCC vectorization library; I could have used in addition -mveclibabi=svml, but I have decided that there are already enough results for GCC.

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]