Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 41

Thread: AMD's FX-8150 Bulldozer Benefits From New Compilers, Tuning

Hybrid View

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    14,366

    Default AMD's FX-8150 Bulldozer Benefits From New Compilers, Tuning

    Phoronix: AMD's FX-8150 Bulldozer Benefits From New Compilers, Tuning

    After looking at how Intel's Sandy Bridge processor performance has evolved with the new GCC 4.7 compiler and Apple's forthcoming LLVM 3.1 with Clang, here are benchmark results from the AMD FX-8150 "Bulldozer" Eight-Core processor with GCC 4.7.0 and the latest LLVM/Clang 3.1 development code along with looking at the performance impact of various compiler tuning flags for this latest-generation AMD CPU. Making things even more interesting, AMD's Open64 4.5.1 compiler was also tossed into the testing mix.

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=17265

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    70

    Default more proof that amd sucks at software

    more proof that amd sucks at software.
    its own compiler produces slower binaries than GCC. when their developers have had some part in BD from the first working chips, and still they cant make a compiler that is producing better binaries than GCC.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    492

    Default

    Pentium4 also produced good numbers when the code was compiled specifically for its architecture. We all know how that ended. Maybe these days there is more interest in distributing optimized binaries?

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    2,926

    Default

    Gentoo FTW?

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    117

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by pingufunkybeat View Post
    Gentoo FTW?
    This. Gentoo FTW. Frankly, Gentoo is the only reason I would consider the Bulldozer.

    Would be neat to see something like Gentu (Ubuntu + Gentoo lol) with a spawn of portage + aptitude... binaries for all different processors (you could do binaries for all different USE flags too, theoretically, but that would just be a HUGE undertaking with some packages having 100+ USE flags that's at least 100^100 builds). I think it could be done but that just makes the repositories that much more critical etc.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Toruń, Poland
    Posts
    160

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by fuzz View Post
    This. Gentoo FTW. Frankly, Gentoo is the only reason I would consider the Bulldozer.

    Would be neat to see something like Gentu (Ubuntu + Gentoo lol) with a spawn of portage + aptitude... binaries for all different processors (you could do binaries for all different USE flags too, theoretically, but that would just be a HUGE undertaking with some packages having 100+ USE flags that's at least 100^100 builds). I think it could be done but that just makes the repositories that much more critical etc.
    Hardware optimizations would be enough. How many people out there actually would use USE flags if they knew and understood them? Imagine a situation where a friend comes with a new camera to share the photos. What would you with super-optimized kernel that has only drivers you need? I believe the USE flags are becoming obsolete. Nowadays we use machines which are strong enough to deal with "bloated" code. Also, the more functions are enabled in the program, the more it is prepared for unexpected situations, like the camera example above. Concluding, the software should have compiled-in all the stable functions.

    I had dreamed about the multi-optimized distributions for years already, since my first contact with Gentoo. However, I am not skilled yet to try something on my own. After thinking about it for a long time I decided what kind of system would be most efficient. A tool would need to be created, which determines the suitable optimizations. Even better, if optimizations would be selected for each package (as in package manager) separately. Distribution would be installed from a precompiled installation media and then it would recompile itself with the aforementioned tool. All new packages would be compiled during installation with tool too. This way, the cost of package maintenance would actually lessen while the users got a faster system.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    2,926

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by fuzz View Post
    This. Gentoo FTW. Frankly, Gentoo is the only reason I would consider the Bulldozer.

    Would be neat to see something like Gentu (Ubuntu + Gentoo lol) with a spawn of portage + aptitude... binaries for all different processors (you could do binaries for all different USE flags too, theoretically, but that would just be a HUGE undertaking with some packages having 100+ USE flags that's at least 100^100 builds). I think it could be done but that just makes the repositories that much more critical etc.
    OpenSUSE Build Service FTW?

  8. #8
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Owatonna, Minnesota, USA
    Posts
    98

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by fuzz View Post
    Would be neat to see something like Gentu (Ubuntu + Gentoo lol) with a spawn of portage + aptitude... binaries for all different processors (you could do binaries for all different USE flags too, theoretically, but that would just be a HUGE undertaking with some packages having 100+ USE flags that's at least 100^100 builds). I think it could be done but that just makes the repositories that much more critical etc.
    That's what Sabayon is trying to achieve with its Entropy system.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    143

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by pingufunkybeat View Post
    Gentoo FTW?
    Fuck the what??

  10. #10

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by pingufunkybeat View Post
    Gentoo FTW?
    trouble is that gentoo is still on GCC 4.5.3
    http://packages.gentoo.org/package/sys-devel/gcc

Posting Permissions

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