On Tue, 2006-01-03 at 08:30 -0600, David Schanen wrote: > On 1/2/06, Stefan Teleman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Things have probably changed since then as there were major compiler > > > releases since then. Maybe it would be a good time to rerun it with > > > Sun Studio 11 (-fast) and equivalent on gcc 4.0 (-O3 -ffast-math > > > -funroll-loops -mcpu=ultrasparc3 -m64 -mvis -ftree-vectorize). > > > And after all, they are still just benchmarks. Results could be the > > > other way around with different benchmarks as seen in your case. > > > > -fast is not the fastest option on either SPARC or X86. he who uses > > -fast shall be disappointed. :-) it actually generates significantly > > _slower_ code than other options (which require more work because they > > need to be written out). > I would be very careful using any optimization that sets the -fns on > Sun Studio, as I've seen significant differences in results when > enabling this. For that matter, -ffast-math has a similar effect with > gcc. > I question how much any of this would affect KDE though, since > enhancements to both Sun Studio and GCC optimization have had to do > additions for the new incarnations of simd instructions and should > really only affect floating point performance, so far as I am aware. > For something like KDE I would imagine that the memory footprint would > be more important than anything else when it comes to performance. Am > I missing something?
No. You are absolutely right. That was exactly my point when I was objecting the statement that "Sun Studio" can imporve KDE performance. Overall KDE performance depends on so many other things and compiler is a last thing to look at in that list. _______________________________________________ opensolaris-discuss mailing list [email protected]
