similar to: [LLVMdev] Benchmarks

On Fri, 30 Apr 2004, Reid Spencer wrote: > Dear List, > > There's been some recent discussion on the list about benchmarks. I just > read a Dr. Dobbs article on the relative runtime performance of various > compilers (8 of them compared) on Intel platforms. The test focused on > mainly template type things but offers Dhrystone and zlib for > comparisons. I bought the

Hi, I''ve read that Dr. Dobbs Journal''s last issue has a cover article about Rails titled "Ruby On Rails - Java''s Successor?". Can''t find anything about it in http://www.ddj.com Does someone have the paper edition and can confirm that, and tell how the article looks like, and so on. Thanks, -- Jean-Fran?ois. -- ? la renverse.

On Fri, 30 Apr 2004, Reid Spencer wrote: > There's been some recent discussion on the list about benchmarks. I just > read a Dr. Dobbs article on the relative runtime performance of various > compilers (8 of them compared) on Intel platforms. The test focused on > mainly template type things but offers Dhrystone and zlib for > comparisons. Interesting, I'll definitely take

On 03/17/2010 10:12 PM, Tanya Lattner wrote: > The 2.7 binaries are available for testing: > http://llvm.org/pre-releases/2.7/pre-release1/ > > You will also find the source tarballs there as well. > > We rely on the community to help make our releases great, so please help > test 2.7 if you can. Please follow these instructions to test 2.7: > > /To test llvm-gcc:/

On Mar 24, 2010, at 2:47 PM, Török Edwin wrote: > On 03/17/2010 10:12 PM, Tanya Lattner wrote: >> The 2.7 binaries are available for testing: >> http://llvm.org/pre-releases/2.7/pre-release1/ >> >> You will also find the source tarballs there as well. >> >> We rely on the community to help make our releases great, so please help >> test 2.7 if you

The 2.7 binaries are available for testing: http://llvm.org/pre-releases/2.7/pre-release1/ You will also find the source tarballs there as well. We rely on the community to help make our releases great, so please help test 2.7 if you can. Please follow these instructions to test 2.7: To test llvm-gcc: 1) Compile llvm from source and untar the llvm-test in the projects directory (name it

screw that site, its useless info run by a linux gnu zealot. 2009/9/14 Chris Lattner <clattner at apple.com>: > On Sep 14, 2009, at 3:20 AM, Stefano Delli Ponti wrote: > >> http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php? >> page=article&item=apple_llvm_gcc&num=1 > > Unfortunately, they don't specify what flags are used, what > architecture is compiled for etc.

FYI http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=gcc_llvm_clang&num=1

I tried to speed up Dhrystone on ARM Cortex-A8 by optimizing the memcpy intrinsic. I used the Neon load multiple instruction to move up to 48 bytes at a time . Over 15 scalar instructions collapsed down into these 2 Neon instructions. fldmiad r3, {d0, d1, d2, d3, d4, d5} @ SrcLine dhrystone.c 359 fstmiad r1, {d0, d1, d2, d3, d4, d5} It seems like this should be faster. But I did

On Nov 9, 2009, at 7:34 PM, Neel Nagar wrote: > I tried to speed up Dhrystone on ARM Cortex-A8 by optimizing the > memcpy intrinsic. I used the Neon load multiple instruction to move up > to 48 bytes at a time . Over 15 scalar instructions collapsed down > into these 2 Neon instructions. > > fldmiad r3, {d0, d1, d2, d3, d4, d5} @ SrcLine dhrystone.c 359 > fstmiad

On Nov 9, 2009, at 5:59 PM, David Conrad wrote: > On Nov 9, 2009, at 7:34 PM, Neel Nagar wrote: > >> I tried to speed up Dhrystone on ARM Cortex-A8 by optimizing the >> memcpy intrinsic. I used the Neon load multiple instruction to move >> up >> to 48 bytes at a time . Over 15 scalar instructions collapsed down >> into these 2 Neon instructions. Nice. Thanks

On 27 April 2010 08:18, Stefano Delli Ponti <stefano.delliponti at gmail.com> wrote: > FYI > http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=gcc_llvm_clang&num=1 For Apache and Dhrystone, the performance boost is good (but only the former is really important), but for the rest, especially those with image/sound processing, and HMMR, it's still far behind. Is this only

On Mon, Sep 14, 2009 at 12:23 PM, Renato Golin <rengolin at systemcall.org>wrote: > 2009/9/14 Edward O'Callaghan <eocallaghan at auroraux.org>: > > screw that site, its useless info run by a linux gnu zealot. > > Well, being a Linux GNU zealot doesn't invalidate numbers. What does > invalidate is that he has no numbers! > > He just fired a few

Thanks Kristof. Sounds like we'll need to investigate though I'd say it is not blocking the switch. At this point I think everybody is on board to flip the switch. @Eric, how does that sound to you? Thanks, Q > Le 1 juin 2017 à 07:46, Kristof Beyls <Kristof.Beyls at arm.com> a écrit : > > >> On 31 May 2017, at 17:07, Quentin Colombet <qcolombet at

LLVMers, The 2.2 prerelease is now available for testing: http://llvm.org/prereleases/2.2/ If anyone can help test this release, I ask that you do the following: 1) Build llvm and llvm-gcc (or use a binary). You may build release (default) or debug. You may pick llvm-gcc-4.0, llvm-gcc-4.2, or both. 2) Run 'make check'. 3) In llvm-test, run 'make TEST=nightly report'. 4) When

Hi all, I added a buildbot [1] running the test-suite with -O0 -global-isel. It runs into the same 2 timeouts that I reported previously on this thread (paq8p and scimark2). It would be nice to make it green before flipping the switch. At the moment, it lives in an internal buildmaster that I've setup for this purpose. If we fix it and it proves to be stable for a week or two, I'll move

Hi All, Could anyone point me to some good benchmarking tools to measure the runtime performance of clang compiled C++ applications. Thanks ! - Jyoti -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20131003/3cc029f1/attachment.html>

Hi all, i was thinking that this question was not good right after relese 1.0, but now perhaps it is OK... if not, then I am sorry. So, what about current status of benchmarks? I mean comparison to gcc. I have looked at http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu/testresults/X86/ Unfortunatelly graphs lines are hardly for human eye, but tables are OK. I give my own interpretation for April 26, 2004

LLVMers, The 2.1 pre-release (version 1) is available for testing: http://llvm.org/prereleases/2.1/version1/ I'm looking for members of the LLVM community to test the 2.1 release. There are 2 ways you can help: 1) Download llvm-2.1, llvm-test-2.1, and the appropriate llvm-gcc4.0 binary. Run "make check" and the full llvm-test suite (make TEST=nightly report). 2) Download

Hello; I was able to build and install llvm(3.0) under Ubuntu 11.10 (using the ./configure script found under llvm source, and then make and make install). While configuring, I gave --prefix as a directory where I would like llvm to be installed. I did not give --with-llvmgccdir and the --enable-optimized argument to configure. Because 3.0 doesn't come with llvmgcc source/binaries and I