And this one, with LLVM ~3.0: http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=amd_bulldozer_compilers&num=1 -----Original Message----- From: llvmdev-bounces at cs.uiuc.edu [mailto:llvmdev-bounces at cs.uiuc.edu] On Behalf Of Martin Whitaker Sent: Thursday, November 03, 2011 11:01 Cc: LLVM Developers Mailing List Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] The performance of LLVM vs GCC [and copy to list] Jianzhou Zhao wrote:> Hi all, > > This talk includes the performance comparison between LLVM and GCC > (page 30/31): LLVM wins a lot for both compilation and execution time. > http://llvm.org/pubs/2008-10-04-ACAT-LLVM-Intro.pdf > That talk and data were in 2008, I was wondering if there is any > updated performance evaluation between the latest LLVM and GCC? > Thanks. >Here's a more recent one: http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=gcc_46_llvm29&num=1 Martin _______________________________________________ LLVM Developers mailing list LLVMdev at cs.uiuc.edu http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvmdev --------------------------------------------------------------------- Intel Israel (74) Limited This e-mail and any attachments may contain confidential material for the sole use of the intended recipient(s). Any review or distribution by others is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender and delete all copies.
On 11/03/11 10:11, Rotem, Nadav wrote:> And this one, with LLVM ~3.0: > > http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=amd_bulldozer_compilers&num=1What, no dragonegg?! :) Ciao, Duncan.
> > http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=amd_bulldozer_compilers&num=1 > > What, no dragonegg?! :)+1 -- Wei-Ren Chen (陳韋任) Computer Systems Lab, Institute of Information Science, Academia Sinica, Taiwan (R.O.C.) Tel:886-2-2788-3799 #1667
On Nov 3, 2011, at 3:27 AM, Duncan Sands wrote:> On 11/03/11 10:11, Rotem, Nadav wrote: >> And this one, with LLVM ~3.0: >> >> http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=amd_bulldozer_compilers&num=1 > > What, no dragonegg?! :)It is worth pointing out that the methodology of Phoronix makes their results basically useless. They willfully test -O0 codegen against different compilers, don't mention when a test is using OpenMP or not, and (in this case) are testing on a micro architecture that only one of the compilers is tuned for. YMMV, but I consider their results to be complete garbage. It's nice to see Clang beating the pants off GCC in some tests though ;-) -Chris