 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Hello,
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
"P-IV" is a Intel(R) Pentium(R) 4 CPU 1.60GHz
running SuSE Linux with kernel 2.4.16-4GB
"Athlon" is a AMD Athlon(TM) XP 1500+ (1343.051 MHz)
running SuSE Linux with kernel 2.4.10-4GB
Compiling options were:
gcc 2.95.3 -O3 -finline-functions -ffast-math -ansi -march=i686 -DCPU=686
gcc 3.0.1 -O3 -finline-functions -ffast-math -foptimize-sibling-calls
-ansi -march=i686 -DCPU=686
gcc 3.1 -O3 -finline-functions -ffast-math -foptimize-sibling-calls
-ansi -march=i686 -DCPU=686
icc 6 -O3 -tpp6 -xK -unroll -ip
icc 6 IV -O3 -tpp7 -xW -unroll -ip
The last version is optimized for Pentium-IV. That's why the binary doesn't
run on the Athlon.
Best regards
Thomas
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
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!
--
Alessandro Coppo
a.coppo@<REMOVE_ME>iol.it
www.geocities.com/alexcoppo
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> 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
Interesting. Looks like the last gcc is worth installing.
Well, I would have been glad to see gcc-3.0.4 intead of 3.0.1 :o)
Do you have any idea about the advantage of -foptimize-sibling-calls ?
And what is icc by the way ?
- Nicolas Calimet
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> 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
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
