Author: Dann Corbit
Date: 13:21:56 02/15/04
Go up one level in this thread
On February 15, 2004 at 16:20:48, Slater Wold wrote: >On February 15, 2004 at 16:10:55, Dann Corbit wrote: > >>On February 15, 2004 at 15:45:02, Slater Wold wrote: >> >>>My setup: >>> >>>AMD FX 51 >>>Windows 2003 Enterprise (64 bit) >>>Intel 8.0 Compiler >>> >>> >>>Why would compiling Crafty 19.10 be 15% slower when defining /DVC_INLINE_ASM & >>>/DUSE_ASSEMBLY? >>> >>>Has anyone else ever seen that? >> >>It may mean that the compiler generated better assembly than you did. >> >>It may also mean that you pulled in the wrong assembly. Old x86 assembly will >>run on the AMD opteron type systems. It is the new stuff that will really be >>snappy. > >ICC doesn't seem to like Bob's assembly code to start off with. > > >vcinline.h(28): warning #1011: missing return statement at end of non-void funct >ion "PopCnt" > } > ^ > >vcinline.h(41): warning #1011: missing return statement at end of non-void funct >ion "FirstOne" > } > ^ > >vcinline.h(54): warning #1011: missing return statement at end of non-void funct >ion "LastOne" > } > ^ Compiler bug. It does not recall that the return is stored in EAX. Print the rest of the routine that it is crying about. I am guessing it is pulling in the wrong assembly. >Here is the result using /DVC_INLINE_ASM & /DUSE_ASSEMBLY: > >Total nodes: 89942714 >Raw nodes per second: 1577942 >Total elapsed time: 57 >SMP time-to-ply measurement: 11.228070 > >Here is the result without it: > >Total nodes: 89942714 >Raw nodes per second: 1635322 >Total elapsed time: 55 >SMP time-to-ply measurement: 11.636364 > > >Doing a few other things, I've got it from 15% to 3%. But still slower.
This page took 0.01 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.