Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Bart Verwilst <verwilst@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev@g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] gcc 2.95.3 / 3.0.4 speed comparsion
Date: Sun, 07 Apr 2002 18:20:38
Message-Id: 200204080120.38979.verwilst@gentoo.org
In Reply to: [gentoo-dev] gcc 2.95.3 / 3.0.4 speed comparsion by Spider
1 Hmm.. so gcc 3.x is indeed slower than gcc 2.95.3...
2 That's it, no more gcc 3.x plans for me for the first few months! :o)
3
4 Thanks!
5
6 On Monday 08 April 2002 00:54, Spider wrote:
7 || Hello, I've just upgraded my -rc6 to -1.0-gcc3 and decided to make an
8 || (unofficial) benchmark.
9 ||
10 || I went for galeon, I had originally intended to use mozilla, but the
11 || time-results borked so I go for galeon instead.. smaller codebase, so
12 || its not as great difference, but it does have both c and c++ code, so it
13 || might be a decent choice.
14 ||
15 ||
16 || gcc 2.95.3 :
17 || real 3m38.592s
18 || user 2m46.810s
19 || sys 0m28.100s
20 || CFLAGS="-march=i686 -O3 -pipe"
21 || CXXFLAGS="-march=i686 -O3 -pipe"
22 ||
23 ||
24 || gcc 3.0.4 :
25 || real 5m6.465s
26 || user 3m27.440s
27 || sys 0m30.140s
28 || CFLAGS="-march=athlon -O3 -pipe"
29 || CXXFLAGS="-march=athlon -O3 -pipe"
30 ||
31 ||
32 ||
33 ||
34 || if you only compare the "user" time it should be enough... as the "sys"
35 || show, there's a few percentages difference between them, so this is not
36 || scientific or anything.
37 ||
38 || Would be interesting to compare the results as well, since those are
39 || quite likely rather different with the new levels of optimization...
40 ||
41 ||
42 || //Spider
43
44 --
45 Bart Verwilst
46 Gentoo Linux Developer, Desktop Team
47 Gent, Belgium