Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

An Early Look At GCC 12 Compiler Performance On The Core i9 12900K

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

  • Sin2x
    replied
    Originally posted by brad0 View Post

    Clear Linux winning has nothing to do with -O3.
    What does it have to do with in your opinion?

    Leave a comment:


  • Raka555
    replied
    So the trend continues where the new version is slower than the old version.

    The untold story is how much slower it will be to compile something.

    micheal Can you please also include the time it takes to compile each test (old vs new) ?

    Leave a comment:


  • brad0
    replied
    Originally posted by Sin2x View Post
    Clear Linux consistently wins in benchmarks on Phoronix and they use O3 -- with a plethora of other optimizations enabled, though.
    Clear Linux winning has nothing to do with -O3.

    Leave a comment:


  • ms178
    replied
    Very recently GCC12 started to be able to compile the Kernel successfully again. That was broken for months.

    Leave a comment:


  • CochainComplex
    replied
    Originally posted by birdie View Post

    PTS is open source, so you're welcome to contribute.
    Best comment so far!

    Leave a comment:


  • Sin2x
    replied
    Originally posted by SigHunter View Post
    are the produced binaries with -O3 -flto in some way measurably faster than the ones with -O2?
    Clear Linux consistently wins in benchmarks on Phoronix and they use O3 -- with a plethora of other optimizations enabled, though.

    Leave a comment:


  • SigHunter
    replied
    are the produced binaries with -O3 -flto in some way measurably faster than the ones with -O2?

    Leave a comment:


  • kylew77
    replied
    No complaints about the charts. They convey the information well enough. Michael works 100 hour weeks and probably doesn't make much money keeping this wonderful site going for over a decade now I think. He worked his butt off at the beginning of the year doing a *BSD flavor comparison I asked for just for me.

    What is interesting is that -mach=native sometimes yielded no gains, sometimes substantial gains, and curiously enough sometimes huge performance losses!

    Leave a comment:


  • dmalcolm
    replied
    Error bars would be a big step forward; it's hard to know to what extent results are affected by noise (especially with just N=3).

    Benchmarking is hard; see e.g. https://speakerdeck.com/haypo/how-to...able-benchmark (disclosure: Victor is a colleague of mine).

    From the "please may I have a pony" department: even better would be for the benchmark to detect where the hotspots in the profile are, and to compare the generated asm before/after for the pertinent hotspots, and file some kind of actionable bug report in our bug tracker (caveat: I'm a GCC developer, though I focus mostly on diagnostics rather than optimization).

    Leave a comment:


  • DavidBrown
    replied
    The charts in the benchmarks only have one real flaw - the mix of "bigger is better" and "smaller is better" makes them far harder to understand. It would be a huge step forward to be consistent - bigger is better.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X