This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Benchmarks gcc 3.0.4 (soon 3.1) vs. Intel C++ 6.0
- From: Tim Prince <tprince at computer dot org>
- To: Jack Lloyd <lloyd at acm dot jhu dot edu>, "Gcc at Gnu dot Org" <gcc at gnu dot org>
- Date: Thu, 9 May 2002 08:20:24 -0700
- Subject: Re: Benchmarks gcc 3.0.4 (soon 3.1) vs. Intel C++ 6.0
- References: <Pine.LNX.4.33L2.email@example.com>
- Reply-to: tprince at computer dot org
On Thursday 09 May 2002 07:33, Jack Lloyd wrote:
> On Thu, 9 May 2002, Jan Hubicka wrote:
> > Note that comparing gcc to Intel C++, Intel C++ seems to win for numeric
> > code, while for integer code, the results are usually much more balanced.
> I just yesterday got a copy of Intel C++ 6.0 and compiled benchmarks of a
> bunch of integer heavy code (virtually no fp used). I found GCC 3.0.4 to be
> significantly faster.
> GCC: -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer -fstrict-aliasing -march=athlon
> ICC: -O2 -tp i686 -ip
> YMMV and all that. -Jack
icc's equivalent to -fstrict-aliasing is -ansi. It's not a default. AFAIK,
the -tp options most likely to work well on Athlon are -tpp6 (P-II/III) or
-tpp7 (P4), and you should be using -xi (P-II) or -xK (P-III/Palomino)
options, unless you want the default 586 code. The -axK option will generate
both a 586 and a P-III code path, but the Athlon will take the 586. Triumph
of Intel marketing.