freebsd stable - Aug 2016 - Benchmarks results for Compilers on FreeBSD 11

El 28/8/2016 0:06, "Erich Dollansky" <erichsfreebsdlist at
alogt.com> escribi?:
>
> Hi,
>
> Micheal did a plain compiler benchmark on FreeBSD 11:
>
>
http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=freebsd11-clang-gcc&num=1
>
> It shows clearly how slow CLang is compared to GCC.
>
> This is the price FreeBSD has to pay to be free of GPL in the base
> system.
>
> Erich
Very cool comparison, thanks a lot!

I think gcc has a lot of knowledge and experience under its belt, a larger
user base so no wonder it performs [slightly] worse. What has really
surprised me has been ImageMagick, apparently because of openmp. The OpenMP
stack has been contributed by intel, clang 3.4 if I recall it right.
Surprising.

Cheers,
Fernando

Hi,

On Sun, 28 Aug 2016 01:41:42 +0200
Fernando Herrero Carr?n <elferdo at gmail.com> wrote:
> El 28/8/2016 0:06, "Erich Dollansky" <erichsfreebsdlist at
alogt.com>
> escribi?:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > Micheal did a plain compiler benchmark on FreeBSD 11:
> >
> >  
>
http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=freebsd11-clang-gcc&num=1
> >
> > It shows clearly how slow CLang is compared to GCC.
> >
> > This is the price FreeBSD has to pay to be free of GPL in the base
> > system.
> >
> > Erich  
> 
> Very cool comparison, thanks a lot!
> 
> I think gcc has a lot of knowledge and experience under its belt, a
> larger user base so no wonder it performs [slightly] worse. What has
> really surprised me has been ImageMagick, apparently because of
> openmp. The OpenMP stack has been contributed by intel, clang 3.4 if
> I recall it right. Surprising.
> 
this time, Micheal did a good job. GCC is just too old to be bad. The
situation was the same for GCC when it was compared to commercial
compilers those days. GCC was a lot slower.

Erich

Hi,

Micheal continued:

http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=FreeBSD-OpenMP-Base

I just wonder if not enabling an option in base because the option is
not required in base would make the documentation of the program
useless except it is documented. The problem here is now that e.b. I
look typically for information of a program at the program's site. I
do not think that they care there what FreeBSD makes out of the
program.

With other words, it creates confusion.

Erich


On Sun, 28 Aug 2016 01:41:42 +0200 Fernando Herrero Carr?n
<elferdo at gmail.com> wrote:
> El 28/8/2016 0:06, "Erich Dollansky" <erichsfreebsdlist at
alogt.com>
> escribi?:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > Micheal did a plain compiler benchmark on FreeBSD 11:
> >
> >  
>
http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=freebsd11-clang-gcc&num=1
> >
> > It shows clearly how slow CLang is compared to GCC.
> >
> > This is the price FreeBSD has to pay to be free of GPL in the base
> > system.
> >
> > Erich  
> 
> Very cool comparison, thanks a lot!
> 
> I think gcc has a lot of knowledge and experience under its belt, a
> larger user base so no wonder it performs [slightly] worse. What has
> really surprised me has been ImageMagick, apparently because of
> openmp. The OpenMP stack has been contributed by intel, clang 3.4 if
> I recall it right. Surprising.
> 
> Cheers,
> Fernando