Results 1 to 6 of 6

Thread: LLVM/Clang vs. GCC On The ARM Cortex-A15 Preview

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    15,419

    Default LLVM/Clang vs. GCC On The ARM Cortex-A15 Preview

    Phoronix: LLVM/Clang vs. GCC On The ARM Cortex-A15 Preview

    The latest ARM Cortex-A15 benchmarks on Phoronix is an extension of the earlier compiler testing from this modern ARM CPU found on the Samsung Exynos 5 Dual within the Samsung Chromebook. In this round of performance testing, the LLVM/Clang compiler performance is compared to recent releases of the GNU Compiler Collection on this latest-generation ARM hardware.

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=18221

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    637

    Default Boring...

    GCC is still years ahead of llvm and there's no chance llvm will ever be on pair.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    302

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Pawlerson View Post
    GCC is still years ahead of llvm and there's no chance llvm will ever be on pair.
    LLVM had some heavy work done for arm in 3.1 and 3.2 ... not benchmarking those as well makes this comparison sort of hollow. I mean really 3.0 is nearly 2 releases old at this poit as 3.2 has been branched for release all the way back on November 12th.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    40

    Default cray

    Cray is silly benchmark, but it did improve in gcc 4.8 due to inlining of raysphere http://gcc.opensuse.org/c++bench-frescobaldi/c-ray/
    I wonder why this is not seen here. What are the flags used?

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    74

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Pawlerson View Post
    GCC is still years ahead of llvm and there's no chance llvm will ever be on pair.
    no matter what happens in terms of fast or slow executables, compiling time, e.t.c.
    gcc will always be the first choice for everybody because you can even compile something to run on a toaster.

    The only thing I want from gcc is a better error/warning recognizing and printing system(put also some colors in there too )

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    362

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Yorgos View Post
    no matter what happens in terms of fast or slow executables, compiling time, e.t.c.
    gcc will always be the first choice for everybody because you can even compile something to run on a toaster.

    The only thing I want from gcc is a better error/warning recognizing and printing system(put also some colors in there too )
    Coming from a Windows world, I've used GCC ONCE, and found it horribly deficient; very little capacity for debugging (compared to MSVC at least). LLVM looks substantially better in that regard, and between 30 seconds of extra compile time and several thousand man-hours saved in debugging due to decent tools, the toolchain will win every time.

    I'd really be interested in what the numbers look like once OpenMP is officially supported. Heck, I'd love to see a comparison with OpenMP disabled in GCC, just to get a decent comparison for how much OpenMP is helping 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
  •