Performance measurements

[Marc Lehmann]

I couldn't resist as well:

-V2.7.2.3 -O6 -mno-align-double					70.99 MFLOPS
-V2.7.2.3 -O6 -malign-double					113.78 MFLOPS

-V1.0.3 -O6 -mno-align-double					125.62 MFLOPS
-V1.0.3 -O6 -malign-double					122.43 MFLOPS

egcs-980628 -O6 -malign-double -funroll-all-loops		135.17 MFLOPS
egcs-980628 -O6 -mno-align-double				141.39 MFLOPS
egcs-980628 -O6 -malign-double -mpentiumpro -march=pentiumpro	144.41 MFLOPS

pgcc-980628 -O2 -malign-double -mno-stack-align-double		155.72 MFLOPS
pgcc-980628 -O2 -malign-double -mstack-align-double		155.72 MFLOPS
pgcc-980628 -O6 -malign-double -mstack-align-double		157.91 MFLOPS
pgcc-980628 -O6 -malign-double -funroll-all-loops		162.46 MFLOPS
					
-B/root/cc/egcs-mmx/gcc/ -O6 -mmx				142.58 MFLOPS

(hardware is a P-II 333) 

now, what is _quite_ interesting is that pgcc (Which means egcs+pentium
patches) seems to perform better with -O2 than egcs with -O6, which is
illogical, since I always believed egcs-O2 should be as fast as pgcc-O2 (and
in general, pgcc's fpu performance is sometimes better, sometimes worse than
corresponding egcs versions, and many programs perform only slightly better
with pgcc on p-ii than with egcs).

I guess I should use that program to show that pgcc is soo much faster ;)

I also don't see the bad performance of egcs vs. gcc-2.7.2.3

      -----==-                                              |
      ----==-- _                                            |
      ---==---(_)__  __ ____  __       Marc Lehmann       +--
      --==---/ / _ \/ // /\ \/ /       pcg@goof.com       |e|
      -=====/_/_//_/\_,_/ /_/\_\                          --+
    The choice of a GNU generation                        |
                                                          |