Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

GCC 4.5 vs. 4.6 On AMD's FX-4100 Bulldozer

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

  • #11
    Originally posted by Michael View Post
    I only had a few minutes before to look into VDrift 2011 but the source package now for it is only 1MB (it should be several hundred MB), and haven't had the time to look into see what changed or how the VDrift build system was altered.
    You can have a look at the archlinux PKGBUILDS from the repositories. They have version 2011.09.01. Should be quite easy to read and guess what it does. (the source data gets extracted to $srcdir and the files in $pkgdir will end up in the package).
    game binary: http://projects.archlinux.org/svntog...86_64/PKGBUILD
    game data: http://projects.archlinux.org/svntog...y-any/PKGBUILD
    Last edited by ChrisXY; 10-21-2011, 06:12 AM.

    Comment


    • #12
      Originally posted by Michael View Post
      I only had a few minutes before to look into VDrift 2011 but the source package now for it is only 1MB (it should be several hundred MB), and haven't had the time to look into see what changed or how the VDrift build system was altered.
      Yes they split the packages into src and data, and haven't released a data package for it. Sadly they just seem to want to distribute data via svn since their previous version. I've been trying to get them to release a data tar file matching the source release so we can get an updated package in Gentoo, but the devs doesn't reply on IRC. Their channel is just quiet. I've only tried for 2 whole days, but you'd think that somebody would reply.

      There's a bug on the Gentoo bugzilla about it describing the issue furter (https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=351409#c7)

      Comment


      • #13
        Originally posted by Azpegath View Post
        Yes they split the packages into src and data, and haven't released a data package for it. Sadly they just seem to want to distribute data via svn since their previous version. I've been trying to get them to release a data tar file matching the source release so we can get an updated package in Gentoo, but the devs doesn't reply on IRC. Their channel is just quiet. I've only tried for 2 whole days, but you'd think that somebody would reply.

        There's a bug on the Gentoo bugzilla about it describing the issue furter (https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=351409#c7)
        I'll check with the main developer when I have the time. Last I knew I even had SVN commit access to VDrift from when I was doing the benchmark mode for it, so hopefully he will listen.
        Michael Larabel
        http://www.michaellarabel.com/

        Comment


        • #14
          Cool, perhaps he can comment on the bug in bugzilla if he gets time. It's sad to have a release that's one and a half years old in portage when they've done two of them since.

          Comment


          • #15
            New entry in the openbenchmarking database, with kernel 3.1, GCC 4.5: normalized result compared to the article's data
            Only C-Ray is tested, though apparently a 27% boost. Is Bulldozer the only CPU getting such improvement?

            Comment


            • #16
              Originally posted by PsynoKhi0 View Post
              New entry in the openbenchmarking database, with kernel 3.1, GCC 4.5: normalized result compared to the article's data
              Only C-Ray is tested, though apparently a 27% boost. Is Bulldozer the only CPU getting such improvement?
              What compiler and compiler options were used? It really does matter!

              From what I've seen until now, only Bulldozer-based CPUs get a hefty performance boost with new kernels and compilers which makes perfectly sense. It's an entirely new architecture and quite a big step from the previous one as well everything else that's been around until now.

              Most notable peculiarities of the Bulldozer module-design are the shared early pipeline stages, L1 instruction and L2 caches. Without OS kernels and compilers take into account and optimizing for this new design they will be inherently crippling the module and turning the per-module performance into closer to single rather than 1.5-2 core performance.

              Comment


              • #17
                Originally posted by pszilard View Post
                What compiler and compiler options were used? It really does matter!

                From what I've seen until now, only Bulldozer-based CPUs get a hefty performance boost with new kernels and compilers which makes perfectly sense. It's an entirely new architecture and quite a big step from the previous one as well everything else that's been around until now.

                Most notable peculiarities of the Bulldozer module-design are the shared early pipeline stages, L1 instruction and L2 caches. Without OS kernels and compilers take into account and optimizing for this new design they will be inherently crippling the module and turning the per-module performance into closer to single rather than 1.5-2 core performance.
                Column On Left > Result File Information (at bottom of column) > Click > Click System Information > cc output. e.g. http://openbenchmarking.org/system/1...GCC%204.5.2/cc among other data from that area
                Michael Larabel
                http://www.michaellarabel.com/

                Comment


                • #18
                  Originally posted by Michael View Post
                  Column On Left > Result File Information (at bottom of column) > Click > Click System Information > cc output. e.g. http://openbenchmarking.org/system/1...GCC%204.5.2/cc among other data from that area
                  Thanks, still haven't taken the time to figure out the OpenBenchmarking.com interface, it might be only me, but I find it a little confusing...

                  Btw, the CC info lines (most notably the "Configured with" line) are not wrapped which makes it unreadable unless copy-pasted out...

                  Comment


                  • #19
                    Originally posted by pszilard View Post
                    Thanks, still haven't taken the time to figure out the OpenBenchmarking.com interface, it might be only me, but I find it a little confusing...

                    Btw, the CC info lines (most notably the "Configured with" line) are not wrapped which makes it unreadable unless copy-pasted out...
                    I always welcome Openbenchmarking.org feedback, particularly for user-interface design things as that's not my area expertise.

                    The lines should wrap now.
                    Michael Larabel
                    http://www.michaellarabel.com/

                    Comment


                    • #20
                      does GCC 4.6 optimise for FMA4 and XOP.

                      FMA can fuse a multiply and an add into a single step, and so could give a big speed up to some code.

                      also wouldn't it be great if GCC had a 'fastest flags that don't break the test-suite' option.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X