Useful comparision - though BSD is, well, …
I think the comparision is a nice one: It’s the practical test of the cost BSD incurs on itself by shunning GPLv3.¹
I would have liked to see as third option a fully optimized GCC 4.8 to make a stronger point of that, though. But the benchmark itself is interesting.
Also I think it’s interesting (and you wrote that), that LLVM cannot yet build all packages which can be built with GCC 4.2.
¹: “we do not use GCC after 4.2, because it is GPLv3+” - So you choose the inferior technology because when you used the better one, you could not shackle your users as badly? Are you serious??? They don’t even have to ship GCC to give their users the packages. So they can actually still give them locked-down devices, they just can’t hand out the compiler and still lock down the whole device. So this is a clear political move against copyleft - and against their users. And I think it about sets the deathblow to any ideas I had to test the freebsd kernel in Gentoo. Their² reason: http://marc.info/?l=freebsd-current&...9688809480&w=2 → “gcc couldn't be used as a convenient front end for a proprietary code generator.”
²: To be fair: This was not the reason of THE BSD folks. It seems to have been the reason of some very vokal GPL haters. But the rest seems to have accepted to live with inferior programs, because some of them don’t like GPL.