Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 15

Thread: GCC performance testing request

  1. #1

    Exclamation GCC performance testing request

    Hello, phoronix guys!

    Can you PLEASE test these versions of GCC: 4.2.4, 4.3.4 and 4.4.2 using whatever benchmarks you like (the more the better).

    I suggest running at least these benchmarks:

    Multimedia
    1) LAME compression/decompression (mp3)
    2) FLAC compression/decompression
    3) VORBIS compression/decompression (ogg)
    4) x264 compression/decompression (H264)

    Web
    1) Firefox page rendering time/miscellaneous JS benchmarks
    2) Chrome
    3) Aurora (rebuild Qt as it's based on Qt's WebKit component)

    Compression
    1) GZIP/BZIP2/7-ZIP compression (of big enough TAR archive)
    2) If you manage to compile e.g. GCC 4.2.4 using all these compilers (which is difficult, since GCC rebuilds itself as a part of a compilation process), then please test compilation times of e.g. heavy C code (say entire kernel 2.6.30 tree) and some heavy C++ code (say Qt library)

    Games
    1) Quake 2 performance when running in software rendering mode
    2) Quake 3 performance using software GL mode (say, running in VESA X.org server), MesaGL library should be rebuild using different compilers, of course

    Rendering
    1) Blender rendering time
    2) PovRay rendering time

    Please try to avoid testing IO bound applications since those results will be meaningless.

    Thank you!
    Last edited by birdie; 10-20-2009 at 12:58 PM. Reason: New GCC versions

  2. #2

    Default

    And if you have enough time, please, test GCC 3.4.6 and ICC 11 (in this case your CPU must be Intel Core 2 or higher, as Intel compiler is known to pessimize code for AMD CPUs).

  3. #3

    Exclamation

    If you haven't yet started testing, please, use the same CFLAGS/CXXFLAGS across all compiled applications.

    I suggest using this set:

    -O2 -march=native -pipe (for GCC >= 4.2)

    and

    -O2 -march=pentium4 -pipe (for GCC 3.4.6 if you are going to use it).

    all other flags can be detrimental or bring unnecessary noise to results.

  4. #4

    Default

    Are you going to run these tests?

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    158

    Default

    Probably he'd want to publish benchmarks like that in response to some news. Like when gcc 4.5 is released.

    The next time something happens in the world of compilers, bring it to his attention and say it calls for benchmarks like the ones you want. It could work.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    331

    Default

    It'd be nice to see a benchmark with and without the -omg-rice CFLAGS, just to see how much difference it makes compared to Ubuntu's i686 binaries. Total size of /usr/{lib,bin} would be interesting to see too.

    I've noticed a few people saying the new ones in GCC4.4 actually make a difference.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    beach trailer in paradise
    Posts
    16

    Default

    if u really want to see something dramatic, run your own bake-off between gcc 2.95, 3.2, and 4.x.

    yes, even gcc gets more strick, more bloated, and slower over time. All software suffers from Creeping Featureitus.

  8. #8

    Default

    You could at least answer to this thread.

    "No" will qualify just fine.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    210

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by birdie View Post
    And if you have enough time, please, test GCC 3.4.6 and ICC 11 (in this case your CPU must be Intel Core 2 or higher, as Intel compiler is known to pessimize code for AMD CPUs).
    Seems like you just gave every reasson needed to not include icc in this specific test since it then would fail as a good general compiler. Writing a sepaprate article about icc amd compatibility itself might be interesting.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    210

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by birdie View Post
    If you haven't yet started testing, please, use the same CFLAGS/CXXFLAGS across all compiled applications.

    I suggest using this set:

    -O2 -march=native -pipe (for GCC >= 4.2)

    and

    -O2 -march=pentium4 -pipe (for GCC 3.4.6 if you are going to use it).

    all other flags can be detrimental or bring unnecessary noise to results.
    probably nocona for 64bit. At this point 32bit testing should be nothing more than a sideshow.

Posting Permissions

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