On Wed, Mar 23, 2005 at 02:53:16PM +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > That's the strange thing - my AMD64 3500+ in 64-bit mode, with 2 GB of > memory and a 250 Gb drive, takes about 30min. But this system _should_ > have more oomph, not less!
Well the Athlon 2800+ is 2087Mhz so at least for raw clock speed it is not much slower than your cpu. Given it is doing 64bit for every pointer instead of 32bit you will have a bit bigger code, and hence a bit more disk access time needed. I may also be wrong on 20 minutes. It might be closer to 30, but I haven't timed it in a while. Given gcc almost certainly does nothing to take advantage of the athlon64 instruction set, I wouldn't be surprised if the 3500+ A64 is not really much faster than an Athlon 2800+ at compiling. What speed is your ram and is it single or dual channel (depends on the socket type in your system). This system is dual channel DDR333 (to match the 333FSB of the Barton core), so it has nice memory bandwidth. If your system is a socket 754 then you at least theoretically have less memory bandwidth than this system which could make compiling slower since it goes through a lot of memory accesses when compiling. The A64 of course has less latency on memory access due to the onboard memory controller, although that doesn't do much for throughput, just latency. > Well, but more than a half of the compile time up to 2/3rds account to > system time, which I think is somewhat excessive. Well you could try doing a make -j 2 or whatever the current method to tell the kernel build system to do multiple things at once since then you might be able to have one task compiling in memory while the other waits for the disk. Maybe, although not for certain. > Maybe it's not processor related, but to the disk driver? Any way to > find out? Well what does hdparm -t /dev/sda say your disk speed is able to do? What kind of HD and what size? Len Sorensen -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
