Results 1 to 8 of 8

Thread: GCC 4.7 Compiler Performance On AMD FX-8150 Bulldozer

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    15,186

    Default GCC 4.7 Compiler Performance On AMD FX-8150 Bulldozer

    Phoronix: GCC 4.7 Compiler Performance On AMD FX-8150 Bulldozer

    While we have seen that Intel's Sandy Bridge is doing well on the new GCC 4.7 compiler, has AMD's Bulldozer CPU architecture advanced at all for this leading multi-platform compiler? Up today are benchmarks of GCC 4.7.0 -- with comparative benchmarks going back to GCC 4.4 -- from an AMD FX-8150 Eight-Core Bulldozer setup.

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=17237

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    492

    Default

    When doing this kind of tests, I believe "timed kernel compilation" should be set apart from other benchmarks.

    You see, while less is better is what we're after, new compiler versions tend to run more optimizations for the same code. So even if the time goes up, if the resulting executable is faster, it's still a win. The current layout of the article does not highlight this particularity at all.

    Jut thought I'd throw my two cents in here.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Scotland
    Posts
    109

    Default

    All the optimisation in the world won't make bulldozer good.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    162

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by scottishduck View Post
    All the optimisation in the world won't make bulldozer good.
    You're right, that would be a regression. The Bulldozer is not a good processor, it is great one!

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    257

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by scottishduck View Post
    All the optimisation in the world won't make bulldozer good.
    Well, maybe it doesn't fit for you or power users like me (ATM I own a Core i7 SB processor), but if you use your computer for tasks such as web-surfing, office, watching HD videos, virtualization, encoding tasks (if you don't care that it takes + 5/10 minutes than Intel SB processors), and even some serious multitasking... AMD Bulldozer processors are more than enough for the consumer...

    About the results, it's great to see that new GCC versions give extra performance boosts for both Intel Core iX and AMD Bulldozer processors in most tests...

    Cheers

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    2,131

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by scottishduck View Post
    All the optimisation in the world won't make bulldozer good.
    When you have a radically different processor not conforming well to ancient binaries, that isn't any kind of indicator of the value/quality of that processor, but to the antiquated nature of the binaries you're trying to run. Bulldozer is an excellent processor, and as compilers advance to take proper advantage of it, it will begin to stand out for what it really is.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Linuxland
    Posts
    5,196

    Default

    When you have a radically different processor not conforming well to ancient binaries, that isn't any kind of indicator of the value/quality of that processor, but to the antiquated nature of the binaries you're trying to run. Bulldozer is an excellent processor, and as compilers advance to take proper advantage of it, it will begin to stand out for what it really is.
    I have to warn you, this is exactly what was said about Itanic too. And the compilers never got good.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    14

    Default

    Can someone explain something? It seems the results from here are about 50% faster than previous review and beating the 3960X.

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

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