Author: Alessandro Damiani
Date: 00:26:19 03/01/03
Go up one level in this thread
On March 01, 2003 at 00:24:41, Robert Hyatt wrote: >On February 28, 2003 at 17:39:55, Dann Corbit wrote: > >>On February 28, 2003 at 17:34:23, Matthew Hull wrote: >> >>>On February 28, 2003 at 14:37:53, Robert Hyatt wrote: >>> >>>>On February 28, 2003 at 12:21:26, Russell Reagan wrote: >>>> >>>>>On February 28, 2003 at 12:15:22, Robert Hyatt wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>I've been using it since version 6.0, and for Crafty it >>>>>>produces the >>>>>>fastest executable of any compiler I have tried. >>>>> >>>>>Fastest linux executable, or fastest executable period, including the MS >>>>>compilers? >>>> >>>> >>>>fastest linux is all I can say with any degree of confidence. I don't have any >>>>easy way >>>>to compare to MSVC and windows since I don't have any "equal" machines here yet. >>>> >>>>We are expecting a group of dual xeons that will be half linux half windows XP >>>>within >>>>a week or two so I might get to compare there, but I'd personally suspect that >>>>MSVC >>>>is going to be better (faster) based on past experience. Intel probably has >>>>closed the gap, >>>>but not completely I suspect. >>> >>> >>>I thought Dan Corbit had said his binaries are done with Intel for max >>>performance on Windows, not MSVC. >> >>Usually, Intel makes better binaries than MS VC++ 6.0 (with all relevant >>patches) >> >>However, the MS VC++ .NET compiler frequently beats the Intel compiler. >> >>In addition, the latest MINGW GCC will sometimes pull a surprise with the right >>combination of compiler flags. > >I try the latest gcc from time to time. I tried the most recent (non-beta) >version today and discovered the profile-based optimization is DOA. Compiles >fine, produces the profile files fine, but re-compiling causes the compiler to >go into a royal snit complaing about corrupted profile data with impossible >branch addresses and the like. And without profiling Intel doesn't just beat >it, it destroys it. Profiling closes the gap, but it doesn't work in the >current gcc 3 compiler (for Crafty it doesn't work, I have not tried it on >other programs). Dann is talking about the MINGW variant of GCC (www.mingw.org). Did you mean this one or the normal GCC? I guess the MINGW is faster than the normal GCC on Windows maschines. Alessandro
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.