Mail Archives: pgcc/1998/08/12/20:09:00
On Sun, Aug 09, 1998 at 10:31:34PM +0800, Pan Xing wrote:
> MS's VC++5.0, it's about 63Mflops .vs. 70 Mflops. Tested with the
> wellknown flops.c (1992 version)
can send me a link of flops.c? or, if it isn't too large, the file
itself?
> I hear that Pgcc can deliver about 2-30% more power than gcc
> generally, So I tested it and gcc again this evening.
> My box is Pii233,64M, Slackware34/linux2.0.30, libc5.44. Test program:
> It seems that the result under Xterm is faster but the one under Ascii
> mode is more accurate. Why, I guess
> In Intel's chip only its internal parallism may affect its difference?
could you try to run the benchmarks so it gives predictable results?
Your results are different enough to be meaningless, I fear.
> --funroll-all-loops -malign-double -mstack-align-double
> -marg-align-double -mpentium,
> All could not save me from the bad luck.
> I installed the pgcc as the readme and install reference in the
> package instructed me . ( patch, configure, make, make install under
> /usr/local/), What's wrong with it? I also got the comiled binary of
> pgcc2.90, no help.
It might be some weird alignment issue, but as I have almost an identical
setup, I can check it out myself.
-----==- |
----==-- _ |
---==---(_)__ __ ____ __ Marc Lehmann +--
--==---/ / _ \/ // /\ \/ / pcg AT goof DOT com |e|
-=====/_/_//_/\_,_/ /_/\_\ --+
The choice of a GNU generation |
|
- Raw text -