Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

PathScale Open-Sources The EKOPath 4 Compiler Suite

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • PathScale Open-Sources The EKOPath 4 Compiler Suite

    Phoronix: PathScale Open-Sources The EKOPath 4 Compiler Suite

    Within the free software world, GCC has long been the dominant compiler with it being backed by the Free Software Foundation, it being the most well developed free compiler suite, and is a feature rich offering that is put out under the GNU GPLv3. As of late, LLVM has also been hitting the nail on the head. The Low-Level Virtual Machine with its C/C++ Clang compiler front-end offers great performance, is successful in building code-bases like the Linux kernel, its modular design allows the compiler infrastructure to be used in areas like graphics drivers, is under a BSD-style license, and carries numerous other advantages. Other open-source compilers have advanced too, including the release of PCC 1.0. Now there is a new and extremely interesting option to shake the open-source compiler world: PathScale is freely releasing the source to the EKOPath 4 Compiler Suite. EKOPath 4 is a high-performance compiler that up until now has been proprietary and costs nearly $2000 USD per license, but now it's open-source and can sharply outperform GCC in many computationally-intense workloads.

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=16135

  • #2
    holy **** this is nice.

    Comment


    • #3
      Were both compilers run without optimizations or what were the options?

      Comment


      • #4
        Considering you've been sitting on this article for two weeks, you could have gotten someone to proof read it

        The first line was particularly horrible to read

        Comment


        • #5
          Neeeeed ebuild.

          Comment


          • #6
            compiler FTW!

            cant wait to see this thingy on my 2 gentoo boxes

            Comment


            • #7
              thanks

              thanks for really interesting news Michael!

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by FireBurn View Post
                Considering you've been sitting on this article for two weeks, you could have gotten someone to proof read it

                The first line was particularly horrible to read
                Quit being so pedantic and celebrate the good news!

                Comment


                • #9
                  It would appear that Phoronix jumped the gun a bit here. So far, there's still nothing on the PathScale site and while a trusted source has told me that the release is still on for now, I'm kind of worried about the effect that the early leak will have...

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    How can such differences exist ?

                    They are big differences in performance.
                    Even if the applications have been well chosen, I would never expect to see such differences by just using another compiler.
                    Maybe this should be considered as bugs in GCC (it must obviously do something wrong to see such a difference).

                    That would be very interesting to compare compilations options, and to see how that works on different configurations as well.

                    And why not using Fedora 15 with GCC 4.6 to perform benchmarks?
                    It's a bit more bleeding edge than Ubuntu.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by Desti View Post
                      Neeeeed ebuild.
                      We'll probably need a bit more than that, perhaps support in gcc-config

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by flammon View Post
                        Quit being so pedantic and celebrate the good news!
                        I celebrated the good news nearly two weeks ago when the beans were first spilled

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by mjkerpan View Post
                          It would appear that Phoronix jumped the gun a bit here. So far, there's still nothing on the PathScale site and while a trusted source has told me that the release is still on for now, I'm kind of worried about the effect that the early leak will have...
                          Michael jumped the gun two weeks ago with all his "hinting". I wonder who will seriously give this site news under embargo again?

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            I wonder of this will be of benefit to mesa then specially the software renderer! Also, how is the c++ 2011 support and can it build qt for example? Even if it can, will that improve performance?

                            this release raises a lot of questions but I'm happy anyway

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by spykes View Post
                              They are big differences in performance.
                              Even if the applications have been well chosen, I would never expect to see such differences by just using another compiler.
                              Maybe this should be considered as bugs in GCC (it must obviously do something wrong to see such a difference).

                              That would be very interesting to compare compilations options, and to see how that works on different configurations as well.

                              And why not using Fedora 15 with GCC 4.6 to perform benchmarks?
                              It's a bit more bleeding edge than Ubuntu.
                              I think one of the main problems is even though OpenMP is supported in GCC very few programs utilise it's features. I think PathScale have found ways of optimizing even with out OpenMP syntax

                              I would be curious to see the results of GCC running with the -ftree-parallelize-loops flag

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X