Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 35

Thread: GCC vs. LLVM-GCC Benchmarks

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    14,652

    Default GCC vs. LLVM-GCC Benchmarks

    Phoronix: GCC vs. LLVM-GCC Benchmarks

    Last Friday we published Mac OS X 10.6 benchmarks and then on Monday they were joined by Ubuntu 9.10 vs. Mac OS X 10.6 benchmarks. One of the requests that has come up since publishing those articles are to carry out a set of tests comparing the performance of LLVM and LLVM-GCC. With Apple's Snow Leopard release, some parts of the operating system were built using LLVM-GCC for optimized performance, although this compiler is not yet matured. In this article we have a set of 12 benchmarks comparing GCC to LLVM-GCC.

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=14164

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by phoronix View Post
    Phoronix: GCC vs. LLVM-GCC Benchmarks

    Last Friday we published Mac OS X 10.6 benchmarks and then on Monday they were joined by Ubuntu 9.10 vs. Mac OS X 10.6 benchmarks. One of the requests that has come up since publishing those articles are to carry out a set of tests comparing the performance of LLVM and LLVM-GCC. With Apple's Snow Leopard release, some parts of the operating system were built using LLVM-GCC for optimized performance, although this compiler is not yet matured. In this article we have a set of 12 benchmarks comparing GCC to LLVM-GCC.

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=14164
    This is one, I think, important note from the release notes (for LLVM 2.5 and the appropriate LLVM-GCC):

    * In this release, the GCC inliner is completely disabled. Previously the GCC inliner was used to handle always-inline functions and other cases. This caused problems with code size growth, and it is completely disabled in this release.

    I think this may have a huge impact on your tested benchmark.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Under the bridge
    Posts
    2,133

    Default

    Ouch, LLVM-GCC was beaten solidly here. Any guesses as to why? Wasn't LLVM supposed to be much faster?

  4. #4
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Third Rock from the Sun
    Posts
    6,583

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BlackStar View Post
    Ouch, LLVM-GCC was beaten solidly here. Any guesses as to why? Wasn't LLVM supposed to be much faster?
    Couple of factors I would guess comes into play. LLVM is fairly young in development and the biggest improvements so far as performance concerning LLVM is the time to compile. Unfortunately we haven't seen any of those compile times in the tests.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    10

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by deanjo View Post
    Couple of factors I would guess comes into play. LLVM is fairly young in development and the biggest improvements so far as performance concerning LLVM is the time to compile. Unfortunately we haven't seen any of those compile times in the tests.
    Plus you won't see any speed advantage because phoronix is using the gcc frontend.

    edit : s/backend/frontend/
    Last edited by Rip-Rip; 09-04-2009 at 09:47 AM.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Italy
    Posts
    82

    Default

    next up we will be testing LLVM/Clang to see how that performs.
    Shouldn't make any difference, Clang is just the frontend, right?

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Italy
    Posts
    82

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Rip-Rip View Post
    Plus you won't see any speed advantage because phoronix is using the gcc backend.
    Hum, LLVM-GCC combines GCC frontend with LLVM backend (optimizer and code generator).

  8. #8
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    10

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tettamanti View Post
    Hum, LLVM-GCC combines GCC frontend with LLVM backend (optimizer and code generator).
    Thanks, I've edited (in fact, I wanted to write frontend...).

  9. #9

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by deanjo View Post
    Couple of factors I would guess comes into play. LLVM is fairly young in development and the biggest improvements so far as performance concerning LLVM is the time to compile. Unfortunately we haven't seen any of those compile times in the tests.
    Someone mentioned there could be only one core used when comes to GCC and Ubuntu vs OS X benchmarks. Btw. I heard GCC is optimized to be good at some benchmarks, but I wonder if its better results have reflection in reality.

  10. #10

    Default

    I've been playing with Clang, and it really is very cool. Compile times are a lot better than GCC, and error messages are far more clear. I'm really glad Apple are funding development for it!

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •