This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Pro64-based GPLed compiler
- From: Marc Gonzalez-Sigler <marc dot gonzalez-sigler at inria dot fr>
- To: Vladimir Makarov <vmakarov at redhat dot com>
- Cc: gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Fri, 01 Jul 2005 10:48:41 +0200
- Subject: Re: Pro64-based GPLed compiler
- References: <42C2C231.6040508@inria.fr> <42C2E1DD.9090508@redhat.com> <1120094349.8950.15.camel@linux-009002219098> <42C4683C.3080909@specifixinc.com> <42C470EB.7000506@redhat.com>
Vladimir Makarov wrote:
I heard a lot of this compiler and expected a better results for it.
Using -O2 -mtune=nocona for gcc4 and -O2 -mtune=em64t for open64 on
em64t machine in 32-bit mode, I found preliminarily that pathscale
compiler generates about 10% worse and 30% larger code (text segment)
for SPECInt2000. It is also 70% slower than gcc4. I just hope results
for 64-bit mode, amd machine, or SPECFP2000 are better.
You might want to give the official release a try. (In other words,
I don't think it's safe to use our "distribution" to judge EKOPath.)
http://www.pathscale.com/ekopath.html
AFAIU, LNO is not performed at -O2, so you should use -O3.
And, if I managed to build the IPA module, you should use -Ofast.
If you are interested, I can run SPECint2000 on a 3.0 GHz Northwood
core, and report the results here.
Finally, as James noted, the performance on AMD CPUs should be
higher than that on Intel CPUs.
--
Regards, Marc