Mail Archives: djgpp/1998/12/04/15:43:51
Message-Id: | <199812042040.UAA18311@remus.clara.net>
|
From: | "Arthur" <arfa AT clara DOT net>
|
To: | <djgpp AT delorie DOT com>
|
Subject: | RE: [Announce] Benchmarks result tested with gcc, egcs and pgcc
|
Date: | Fri, 4 Dec 1998 20:39:55 -0000
|
X-Priority: | 3 (Normal)
|
X-MSMail-Priority: | Normal
|
X-Mailer: | Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2173.0
|
Importance: | Normal
|
In-Reply-To: | <199812032220.RAA00363@delorie.com>
|
X-MimeOLE: | Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3110.3
|
Reply-To: | djgpp AT delorie DOT com
|
> Hi All:
>
> I put some results of compiling the BYTE benchmarks with gcc,
> egcs and pgcc
> using differentswitchs. I included the results of an EXE compiled
> with Watcom
> 10.0a.
>
Very interesting. One minor gripe: your tables are wider than the page so I
had to print them all in landscape to see the figures! Suppose it can't be
helped...
From what I can gather from my own experience and the experience of a few
other people I know, PGCC works very well on non-intel processors, while GCC
2.8.0 doesn't seem to like non-intels that much. I've found that PGCC really
slows down my code with -O6, while gcc 2.8.0 with -march=pentium etc. gives
me a rather large speed boost (Large being one or two percent :-).
BTW, according to the Byte benchmark that I had a few moths ago, my P200MMX
is a 234.3MHz Pentium on average (I think it was roughly the same for both
integer and floats) - that particular benchmark isn't that accurate. No,
I've not overclocked my processor.
James Arthur - jaa AT arfa DOT clara DOT net
http://www.arfa.clara.net/james/
ICQ#15054819
- Raw text -