Message-ID:	<19990623180740.H28851@mindspring.com>
Date:	Wed, 23 Jun 1999 18:07:40 -0500
From:	Anderson MacKay <glenstorm AT mindspring DOT com>
To:	pgcc AT delorie DOT com
Subject:	Re: performance issue
References:	<19990621182836 DOT O28893 AT io DOT txc DOT com> <19990623150531 DOT A9441 AT cerebro DOT laendle> <14193 DOT 18042 DOT 784347 DOT 242833 AT lrz DOT de>
Mime-Version:	1.0
X-Mailer:	Mutt 0.93i
In-Reply-To:	<14193.18042.784347.242833@lrz.de>; from Eugene Leitl on Wed, Jun 23, 1999 at 01:46:20PM -0700
Reply-To:	pgcc AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List:	pgcc AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To:	listserv AT delorie DOT com

On Wed, Jun 23, 1999 at 01:46:20PM -0700, Eugene Leitl wrote:
> <idiotmode>
> Apropos another CPU you don't have: do you think that K7 will be as
> quirky as K6 in respect to compiler options? Assuming both egcs/gcc
> and pgcc.
> </idiotmode>

Probably not.  The K7 has very deep scheduling buffers, which should make
it run quickly on generally well-optimized code, regardless of the asm
scheduling.  It even lacks the restriction of the P2/3 series of needing
to intersperse FADD and FMUL to achieve full floating-point bandwidth.

-- 
Anderson MacKay <mackay AT rice DOT edu>

- Raw text -