Author: Frank Phillips
Date: 10:24:17 10/11/01
Go up one level in this thread
On October 10, 2001 at 17:05:32, Dann Corbit wrote: >On October 10, 2001 at 16:41:15, Frank Phillips wrote: > >>On October 10, 2001 at 15:53:36, Gian-Carlo Pascutto wrote: >> >>>On October 10, 2001 at 14:18:34, Frank Phillips wrote: >>> >>>>When I find out how to access the gcc3.0.1 documentation I installed I may try >>>>to reduce the compiled size and see if it gets faster. >>> >>>-Os for size optimization >>> >>>There are loads of optimization settings and it pays off to >>>tune them for your program. >>> >>>-- >>>GCP >> >>Thanks. Yes I have tried a few combinations including Os. >> >>Interestingly the best combination so far is not the same for gcc3.0.1 as it is >>for gcc2.96. The sizes of the compiled are also revealing >>gcc3.0.1 498kB (same optimisations) >>gcc2.96 393kB (same optimisations) >>MSVC++ 308kB >> >>Something is clearly different in the way these compilers work, which is >>intersting, but I do not know enough to suggest what. > >Intel has a compiler that you Linux folks might want to try. I know that the >purse strings of a Linux user are bound at 100 million PSI, but you could try a >*free* evaluation at least, and see how it compares. I am predicting double the >speed. > >Note that I am not talking about the KAP compiler for Linux (but rather) the >Intel C++ compiler 6.0 for Linux (which is now in beta). Thanks Dan, I may give this a try assuming it works on Mandrake 8.1 as well as RH7.1. Only 100 million psi for the purse strings. My wife has a much stronger grip. The Intel compiler is no doubt wonderful, but I am sure she could suggest better uses for the several hundred dollars it would cost. You guys are obviously rich............................... Frank
This page took 0 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.