 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> I find gcc results "strange"... are you sure? It seems that gcc is getting
> worse and worse!
Nope it's the opposite: "Running time in seconds" so the bench runs
faster with the last gcc.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Alessandro Coppo <a.c### [at] iol it> writes:
> Thomas Willhalm wrote:
>
> > P-IV Athlon
> > gcc 2.95.3 13354 7035
> > gcc 3.0.1 11319 6555
> > gcc 3.1 8971 5901
>
> I find gcc results "strange"... are you sure? It seems that gcc is getting
> worse and worse!
It was rendering time in seconds - and you probably want shorter
rendering times, right? :-)
I find it amusing that Intel's compiler is beaten by GCC on P4, while
the reverse is true on Athlon. They should call it the "Intel C Compiler
for AMD processors"...
--
Ole Laursen
http://sunsite.dk/olau/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Nicolas Calimet <pov### [at] freefr> wrote:
> And what is icc by the way ?
Probably the Intel's own compiler, which should know how to best optimize
for Intel's processors.
--
#macro M(A,N,D,L)plane{-z,-9pigment{mandel L*9translate N color_map{[0rgb x]
[1rgb 9]}scale<D,D*3D>*1e3}rotate y*A*8}#end M(-3<1.206434.28623>70,7)M(
-1<.7438.1795>1,20)M(1<.77595.13699>30,20)M(3<.75923.07145>80,99)// - Warp -
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
In article <87l### [at] bachcomposers> , Ole Laursen
<ola### [at] hardworkingdk> wrote:
> I find it amusing that Intel's compiler is beaten by GCC on P4,
This is under Linux, of course. It may just be a library issue that doesn't
exist under Windows. gcc surely is not such a good compiler...
Thorsten
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
In article <3d05de17@news.povray.org> , Thomas Willhalm
<tho### [at] uni-konstanzde> wrote:
> finally, I've found the time to compare the different compilations of
> povray on a Pentium IV. I used megapovplus and modified povbench.pov from
> povray 3.5 beta to run on it.
>
> Running time in seconds:
> P-IV Athlon
> gcc 2.95.3 13354 7035
> gcc 3.0.1 11319 6555
> gcc 3.1 8971 5901
> icc 6 15907 5679
> icc 6 IV 10589
What are the results of the Windows version on the same system?
Thorsten
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
In article <3d05de17@news.povray.org> , Thomas Willhalm
<tho### [at] uni-konstanzde> wrote:
> icc 6 IV -O3 -tpp7 -xW -unroll -ip
How about adding any one of these: "-ipo", "-wp_ipo", "-prefetch", "-rcd"?
Thorsten
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Warp wrote:
> Nicolas Calimet <pov### [at] freefr> wrote:
>> And what is icc by the way ?
>
> Probably the Intel's own compiler, which should know how to best
> optimize for Intel's processors.
Yes. It's the intel C++ for Linux. A non-commercial unsupported version is
available for linux free of charge at
http://www.intel.com/software/products/eval/
(You can get a 30-day evaluation version for Linux and Windows, too.)
Thomas
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Thorsten Froehlich wrote:
> In article <3d05de17@news.povray.org> , Thomas Willhalm
> <tho### [at] uni-konstanzde> wrote:
>
>> finally, I've found the time to compare the different compilations of
>> povray on a Pentium IV. I used megapovplus and modified povbench.pov
>> from povray 3.5 beta to run on it.
>>
>> Running time in seconds:
>> P-IV Athlon
>> gcc 2.95.3 13354 7035
>> gcc 3.0.1 11319 6555
>> gcc 3.1 8971 5901
>> icc 6 15907 5679
>> icc 6 IV 10589
>
> What are the results of the Windows version on the same system?
I'm sorry. Windows isn't installed on any of these computers. (Well, to be
completely honest, there is Vmware running Windows NT4 on the Athlon, but
IMHO a benchmark of this won't tell us anything.)
THomas
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Thomas Willhalm wrote:
>
> [...]
>
> I'm sorry. Windows isn't installed on any of these computers. (Well, to be
> completely honest, there is Vmware running Windows NT4 on the Athlon, but
> IMHO a benchmark of this won't tell us anything.)
From my experience with POV-Ray 3.5 the Windows version on VMWare runs
usually faster than the gcc linux version. I have not made comparison
tests between plain Windows and emulated Windows but there does not seem
to be that much difference.
Christoph
--
POV-Ray tutorials, IsoWood include,
TransSkin and more: http://www.tu-bs.de/~y0013390/
Last updated 02 Jun. 2002 _____./\/^>_*_<^\/\.______
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Thorsten Froehlich" <tho### [at] trfde> writes:
> In article <87l### [at] bachcomposers> , Ole Laursen
> <ola### [at] hardworkingdk> wrote:
>
> > I find it amusing that Intel's compiler is beaten by GCC on P4,
>
> This is under Linux, of course. It may just be a library issue that doesn't
> exist under Windows. gcc surely is not such a good compiler...
This is povray.unix, so who cares how ICC performs on Windows? Get a
real operating system. :-)
Anyway, AFAIK ICC doesn't include a C library, so they use the same
libraries.
--
Ole Laursen
http://sunsite.dk/olau/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
