From: Vic Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.djgpp Subject: PGCC performance Date: Fri, 27 Feb 1998 23:52:24 +0200 Organization: Communications Accessibles Montreal, Quebec Canada Lines: 31 Message-ID: <34F73598.25E7@cam.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: dialup-696.hip.cam.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com DJ-Gateway: from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp Precedence: bulk There have been some questions about PGCC, if it's worth it etc, so I'll just post my findings. Remember a while ago the DJGPP vs watcom wars? Thomas Djafari posted a little test program to see the performance of the compiler. The test was a DCT jpeg like compressor working on a 2048 by 2048 (pretty big) array. The initial data were: Watcom 11.0 beta Pentium mode 25.3800 Seconds, 3037 millions clocks 18.1800 Seconds, 2179 millions clocks DJGPP v 2.7.2.1 35.3846 Seconds, 4234 millions clocks 26.4835 Seconds, 3170 millions clocks what I found (P133 16 megs RAM): DJGPP PGCC 101 23.3516 Seconds, 3095 millions clocks 19.3407 Seconds, 2566 millions clocks so, as you can see, PGCC IS worth it. It almost tops watcom pentium performance and is a lot better than the normal GCC (Of course this really depends on your situation, but it shows a bit the improvements you might be looking at. here it's almost 30%) -- --> http://www.cam.org/~tudor <--