On Fri, 24 Feb 2012, Ilija Kocho wrote: > On 24.02.2012 20:37, Grant Edwards wrote: > > [snip] > > > [I was hoping the 3.2->4.6 change might produce noticably smaller or > > faster code. The size reduction is about 0.8%, and though I haven't > > done any extensive benchmarking, I haven't noticed any speed > > improvement yet.] > > I haven't compared against 3.2. > > Regarding speed, for Cortex-M3 target the Coremark test shows 12% > speed up of 4.6.2 against 4.3.2. But Cortex-M runs Thumb2 instruction > set, the picture may be different for ARM code.
I call that I had got more dry & whet mips on my arm7tdmi target when I s/3.2.1/4.3.2/ Fortunately, I found my old ask (and results for 3.2.1) on the list :-) http://sourceware.org/ml/ecos-discuss/2006-12/msg00000.html Just now I tried 'dhrystone' test for 4.6.2. Well, I know issues with this test, but ... I got 22 VAX MIPS (GCC 4.6.2) vs 13 VAX MIPS (GCC 3.2.1) for RAM startup and 34 VAX MIPS (GCC 4.6.2) vs 22 VAX MIPS (GCC 3.2.1) for ROM startup (on-chip flash). IMHO, it is nice delta. Of course, it is true for my arm7tdmi target and may be you will get more modest results for your one. Sergei > > Ilija > > -- > Before posting, please read the FAQ: http://ecos.sourceware.org/fom/ecos > and search the list archive: http://ecos.sourceware.org/ml/ecos-discuss > -- Before posting, please read the FAQ: http://ecos.sourceware.org/fom/ecos and search the list archive: http://ecos.sourceware.org/ml/ecos-discuss
