Message-ID: <378B6AE6.B7E12F66@eik.bme.hu> Date: Tue, 13 Jul 1999 18:35:50 +0200 From: "Dr. =?iso-8859-1?Q?Andr=E1s=20S=F3lyom?=" X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.6 [en] (Win98; I) X-Accept-Language: en,hu MIME-Version: 1.0 To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com Subject: Re: gcc 2.96 benchmarks References: <378B57FE DOT 70A60D5C AT inti DOT gov DOT ar> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Reply-To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com salvador wrote: > Hi All! > > I tested the new experimental IA32 (it means x86) branch of gcc 2.96 with > the BYTE benchmarks. > Here are some details: > > 1) MSVC stills the better, but not for much. > 2) 2.96 have the same speed for FPU than MSVC for Pentium MMX processors > (that's in average). Just my experiments with MSVC 5.0: without optimalization my code runs correctly (give same results as MATLAB), with optimization ON it gave incorrect results... Some months ago I read in DDJ (Dr. Dobbs Journal) an interview with the man who created or helped to create the first math co-processor. He said the the floating point optimizations in MSC are inferior and although they speeds things up, they lead to incorrect results. It seems to me he was right... Andras -- ________________________________________________________________ Question #7: How Can I Make Linux More Like Windows? 'Hmmm. Rebuild the kernel to use every memory-hogging feature you can find. Reboot every couple of days whether you need to or not. And every 18 months or so, send a check for $99 to Bill Gates. That should do the trick.' (CNET - 10 questions about Linux [4.28.1999])