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: "Scott Robert Ladd" <scott at coyotegulch dot com>
- To: "Jan Hubicka" <jh at suse dot cz>
- Cc: "Gcc at Gnu dot Org" <gcc at gnu dot org>
- Date: Thu, 9 May 2002 09:20:40 -0400
- Subject: RE: Benchmarks gcc 3.0.4 (soon 3.1) vs. Intel C++ 6.0
I asked RedHat's Richard Henderson about which options I should use for
getting the fastest code from gcc; he only suggested -O2. In fact, he wasn't
real hot on -O3 (which I used) because he thought it might slow code down
I am looking into this further; I hope to have an updated comparison,
including reader comments, over the weekend.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: email@example.com [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org]On Behalf Of
> Jan Hubicka
> Sent: Thursday, May 09, 2002 09:04
> To: Scott Robert Ladd
> Cc: Gcc@Gnu. Org
> Subject: Re: Benchmarks gcc 3.0.4 (soon 3.1) vs. Intel C++ 6.0
> > Hello, all,
> > I've posted a set of benchmarks comparing the performance of
> code generated
> > by gcc 3.0.4 against that generated by Intel C++ 6.0 for Linux:
> > http://www.coyotegulch.com/reviews/intel_comp/intel_gcc_bench2.html
> Interesting comparison..
> Would you please try how does
> change the
> picture? Also you may grab the 3.1.0 prerelease available already and use
> it for benchmarking.
> > Please read the entire article before drawing any conclusions.
> > Scott Robert Ladd
> > Coyote Gulch Productions, http://www.coyotegulch.com
> > No ads -- just very free (and somewhat unusual) code.