This is the mail archive of the gcc@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC 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]

Re: GCC viciously beaten by ICC in trig test!

From: Scott Robert Ladd <coyote at coyotegulch dot com>
To: Gabriel Dos Reis <gdr at integrable-solutions dot net>
Cc: gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
Date: Sun, 14 Mar 2004 20:44:34 -0500
Subject: Re: GCC viciously beaten by ICC in trig test!
References: <4054ED19.8020009@coyotegulch.com> <m34qsruhgx.fsf@uniton.integrable-solutions.net>

Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:

Did you try by declaring doit() inline?
(I suppose that won't change much the outcome, but I'm curious).

I can get it to be inlined, but that doesn't do much for the performance.

This all came up because someone recompiled a program (with ICC) I'd written some years ago for a client -- and they noticed that the ICC version was 3 times faster than the GCC version. I get the same results.

I also note that on my current benchmark suites, GCC 3.3.3 performs as well or better than ICC on all tests (in terms of generated code speed) -- EXCEPT the ones involving trigonometry.

Which is why I was wondering if I'd missed a magic word.

I'll check this out on Sparc and AMD64 in a day or so, to see if it's just a problem with the Pentium 4.

--
Scott Robert Ladd
Coyote Gulch Productions (http://www.coyotegulch.com)
Software Invention for High-Performance Computing

References:
- GCC viciously beaten by ICC in trig test!
  - From: Scott Robert Ladd
- Re: GCC viciously beaten by ICC in trig test!
  - From: Gabriel Dos Reis

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