HORN%HYDRA@sdi.polaroid.com (11/21/90)
I recently conducted a more realistic test of the compilers and found gcc version 1.37.1 significantly faster than Sun cc from 4.0.3 on a SS1. The test was TeX compiled gcc -O -finline... -fstrength... versus cc -O4. The timings were for the average of the last 3 out of 4 TeXings of the bison manual to avoid cache related effects. The gcc version took 60% of the time of the cc version. Drhystones are often misleading. R Horn horn%hydra@polaroid.com
slevy@poincare.geom.umn.edu (Stuart Levy) (11/29/90)
In article <363@brchh104.bnr.ca> HORN%HYDRA@sdi.polaroid.com writes: >I recently conducted a more realistic test of the compilers and found gcc >version 1.37.1 significantly faster than Sun cc from 4.0.3 on a SS1. The >test was TeX compiled gcc -O -finline... -fstrength... versus cc -O4. ... > Drhystones are often misleading. You have to be careful about what is realistic though... Trying some homebrew DES-encryption code with cc -O4 vs. gcc 1.37.1, on a Sparcstation under both 4.0.3 and 4.1, Sun cc won each time by about 10% on both of two DES-related operations. TeX is certainly much bigger, but both are "real" applications. Stuart Levy, Geometry Group, University of Minnesota slevy@geom.umn.edu