I tried the Open64 PGO on these benchmarks. Basically, the training executable runs about 20 times slower. I guess the overhead of open64 PGO is comparable as ICC. But there is not much performance gain from Open64 PGO. Since all test cases are single file, "-O3 -OPT:Ofast" may works better.
2012/6/20 Walter Landry <wlan...@caltech.edu>: > Hello Everyone, > > I thought you might be interested in some C++ expression template > benchmarks I have done. > > http://www.wlandry.net/Projects/FTensor#Benchmarks > > Open64 did better than some, but not as good as others. I tried using > profile guided optimizations, but the training executables were so > slow (at least 100 times slower) that it became impractical. > > Cheers, > Walter Landry > wlan...@caltech.edu > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Live Security Virtual Conference > Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and > threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions > will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware > threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/ > _______________________________________________ > Open64-devel mailing list > Open64-devel@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/open64-devel -- Regards, Lai Jian-Xin ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Live Security Virtual Conference Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/ _______________________________________________ Open64-devel mailing list Open64-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/open64-devel
