[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       gentoo-dev
Subject:    Re: [gentoo-dev] gcc 2.95.3 / 3.0.4 speed comparsion
From:       Bart Verwilst <verwilst () gentoo ! org>
Date:       2002-04-07 23:24:39
[Download RAW message or body]

Oh, and euhm..
What about this?: 
http://gcc.gnu.org/faq.html#optimizing

If gcc itself is optimised with for example '-O3 -fomit-frame-pointer',
won't that make it faster than gcc 2.95.3? :o)
Just taking wild guesses here :o)

See ya

On Monday 08 April 2002 00:54, Spider wrote:
|| Hello, I've just upgraded my -rc6 to -1.0-gcc3 and decided to make an
|| (unofficial) benchmark.
||
|| I went for galeon, I had originally intended to use mozilla, but the
|| time-results borked so I go for galeon instead.. smaller codebase, so
|| its not as great difference, but it does have both c and c++ code, so it
|| might be a decent choice.
||
||
|| gcc 2.95.3 :
|| real    3m38.592s
|| user    2m46.810s
|| sys     0m28.100s
|| CFLAGS="-march=i686 -O3 -pipe"
|| CXXFLAGS="-march=i686 -O3 -pipe"
||
||
|| gcc 3.0.4 :
|| real    5m6.465s
|| user    3m27.440s
|| sys     0m30.140s
|| CFLAGS="-march=athlon -O3 -pipe"
|| CXXFLAGS="-march=athlon -O3 -pipe"
||
||
||
||
|| if you only compare the "user" time it should be enough... as the "sys"
|| show, there's a few percentages difference between them, so this is not
|| scientific or anything.
||
|| Would be interesting to compare the results as well, since those are
|| quite likely rather different with the new levels of optimization...
||
||
|| //Spider

-- 
Bart Verwilst
Gentoo Linux Developer, Desktop Team
Gent, Belgium

[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]