This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
<no subject>
- From: Joerg Beyer <j dot beyer at web dot de>
- To: gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Tue, 28 May 2002 22:58:49 +0200
- Subject: <no subject>
- Organization: http://freemail.web.de/
Hi,
I did some performance comparision of gcc 2.95.3 and gcc 3.1, each with
it's own libstdc++ and STLPort and a set of different compiler flags.
I compared the runtime of ~50 Testcases of C++ code, mainly small STL
using synthetic testcases with gcc 2.95.3 and the current 3.1. I used
gcc's libstdc++ and STLPort as well as a different compile time Flags
(from nothing to "-O3 -fexpensive-optimizations -fpeephole -march=i686
-fgcse -fomit-frame-pointer -funroll-loops").
to give you an idea: each testcase is a function that runs in less
than a second (usually 10th or 1000th times per second). The testcase
is called as long as a given time (e.g. 1 minute) is not over. The
number of calls to the testcase is counted (the loop counter), higher
loop counts are better results. The loop counts are compared for
each set of compile options.
Testcase focus on STL use, like reverse a std::list, appending
chars to a std::string, sorting a vector<int> and so on.
The results are here: http://cbench.sourceforge.net/log.html
you could get the source I used to gather the results here:
http://sourceforge.net/projects/cbench/
Feel free to contact me if you have questions.
Maybe this helps
Joerg