RE: Benchmarks gcc 3.0.4 (soon 3.1) vs. Intel C++ 6.0

["Scott Robert Ladd" <scott at coyotegulch dot com>]

HI,

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
through bloat.

I am looking into this further; I hope to have an updated comparison,
including reader comments, over the weekend.

..Scott

> -----Original Message-----
> From: gcc-owner@gcc.gnu.org [mailto:gcc-owner@gcc.gnu.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
> -funroll-loops/-funroll-all-loops/-fomit-frame-pointer/-ffast-math
>  change the
> picture?  Also you may grab the 3.1.0 prerelease available already and use
> it for benchmarking.
>
> Honza
> >
> > 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.
>