Mail Archives: pgcc/1998/07/16/20:23:47
On Thu, Jul 16, 1998 at 10:22:16AM +0300, Misha wrote:
> Now to the point. I did all what you have adivised me to do (compiler
> flags). Only after adding "-march=pentiumpro", the code gained about
> 23% (the integer only version), and now it is slightly (1.1%) better than
> GCC 2.7.2.1 produced code.
> I am not dissapointed with PGCC, but I think some more work has to be
> done in order to gain the full potential of the P6 (PII+PPro) architecture.
Actually, I've done benchmarking weekend recently. It seems egcs has
lost speed quite considerably, being slower than gcc-2.7.2 since
about one month. (and pgcc won't help here)
EGCS is concerned about that problem and will investigate it. Some people
have look with "-frisc -fno-regmove" (but not for fp-code), which is weird,
and in general the egcs/pgcc snapshots do not performa well with -O3.
> BTW, has anyone ever done a comparison of the same code under PGCC
> and DOS/Win95 compilers (VC++ 5.0, Watcom C/C++, Symantec, Borland,
> Metaware, etc...)?
> I had some difficulties porting my own code but I am working on it now. As
> soon as I have results I will post them here.
cool! Be sure to run your programs under Win95, for an additional
speed advantage ;->
-----==- |
----==-- _ |
---==---(_)__ __ ____ __ Marc Lehmann +--
--==---/ / _ \/ // /\ \/ / pcg AT goof DOT com |e|
-=====/_/_//_/\_,_/ /_/\_\ --+
The choice of a GNU generation |
|
- Raw text -