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
Hi Chris,>>> 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,yes, I mentioned this in another email in this thread. I particularly enjoyed the use of -O0 :) They know about these issues since they added notes about -O0 and openmp to one of their previous sets of benchmarks, probably because of feedback. They never seemed to realize that smallpt uses openmp though! I notice that they do have a note about openmp after the graphicsmagick benchmark, and don't report results for himeno (they were using -O0 for this before), so I guess that's progress. Ciao, Duncan. 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 ;-)
On Nov 3, 2011, at 10:02 AM, Duncan Sands wrote:> They know about these issues since they added notes about > -O0 and openmp to one of their previous sets of benchmarks, probably because of > feedback.Yeah, I sent them feedback before… doesn't seem to have done any lasting good though. -eric -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20111103/ec9948dc/attachment.html>
Hi Duncan Although people would like to know the performance comparison between LLVM and GCC. Dragonegg has an advantage of combining both LLVM and GCC opt. I remember Jack posted some interesting result on the list. [1] Maybe you can post those result on the Dragonegg website so that people know how they can play with Dragonegg. ;-) Regards, chenwj [1] http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/llvmdev/2011-October/043931.html -- 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