Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2000 09:43:38 +0200 (IST)
From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>
X-Sender: eliz AT is
To: "Alexei A. Frounze" <alex DOT fru AT mtu-net DOT ru>
cc: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
Subject: Re: inefficiency of GCC output code & -O problem
In-Reply-To: <38FC66B8.BDE360B3@mtu-net.ru>
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.91.1000419094240.10023G-100000@is>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Reply-To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
Errors-To: nobody AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To: listserv AT delorie DOT com
Precedence: bulk


On Tue, 18 Apr 2000, Alexei A. Frounze wrote:

> Cyrix 6x86.
> Originally it was P266, but something burnt out and now it doesn't work on
> frequencies higher than 133MHz anymore. IMHO a good CPU

It's not a question of ``good'' or ``bad''.  Cyrix is different from
K6.  In particular, K6 is known to write to memory very fast, but read
much slower (or the other way around, I don't remember).  It's also
much more sensitive to alignment of data and code.

Since you asked what might be the cause of different behavior of the
same code, I was suggesting that one of the differences between 
processors is the reason for the different effects of changes in code
on performance.