Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

GCC 8 & LLVM Clang 6.0 Compiler Performance On AMD EPYC - November 2017

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

  • GCC 8 & LLVM Clang 6.0 Compiler Performance On AMD EPYC - November 2017

    Phoronix: GCC 8 & LLVM Clang 6.0 Compiler Performance On AMD EPYC - November 2017

    Given the continuously evolving state of open-source code compilers, especially for the newer AMD Zen "znver1" architecture, here is the latest installment of our compiler benchmarks. Tested for this article from and AMD EPYC 7601 processor were GCC 7.2, GCC 8.0.0, LLVM Clang 5.0, and LLVM Clang 6.0 SVN.

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=25493

  • #2
    Those Redis benchmarks.. If everything functions properly and it's not just a bug, wow.

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by FishPls View Post
      Those Redis benchmarks.. If everything functions properly and it's not just a bug, wow.
      i would be sceptical, that's too much of an increase. that said, yes, if bug free - wow

      Comment


      • #4
        Regarding the redis benchmark, it was compiled in debug mode right?

        gcc options: -ggdb -rdynamic -lm -pthread

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by babali View Post
          Regarding the redis benchmark, it was compiled in debug mode right?

          gcc options: -ggdb -rdynamic -lm -pthread
          -ggdb should yeah, produce debugging information specifically for gdb

          Comment


          • #6
            I have been interested in switching GCC's build system for something other than autotools, the idea is still very early so I didn't ask anything about it in their mailing list.
            One big question in mind is that whether distributing without the new build system as dependence is still necessary today.

            If I simply change it to something like meson or cmake, user will need these tools to be installed in order to compile GCC, while autotools doesn't have such a requirement.

            On the other hand, generating tons of bash code hurts performance and portability, even complexity. I don't have lots of experience with devices other than a PC. It would be nice to hear some options outside.
            Last edited by trivialfis; 11-08-2017, 01:04 PM.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by aht0 View Post
              -ggdb should yeah, produce debugging information specifically for gdb
              That's not a problem though. The problem would be the lack of optimizations enabled if those compile flags are correct and complete.

              Comment


              • #8
                The compile CFLAGS/CXXFLAGS flags were obviously maintained the same during testing. Will do some checking to see if Redis is injecting anything odd based upon compiler name/version but it was just a clean stock build each time.
                Michael Larabel
                http://www.michaellarabel.com/

                Comment


                • #9
                  Typo:

                  Originally posted by phoronix View Post
                  GCC 8.0,.0 20171030,
                  Originally posted by phoronix View Post
                  The newer Clang and GCC development compilers do provide small bosts in performance in some scenarios.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by trivialfis View Post
                    I have been interested in switching GCC's build system for something other than autotools, the idea is still very early so I didn't ask anything about it in their mailing list.
                    One big question in mind is that whether distributing without the new build system as dependence is still necessary today.

                    If I simply change it to something like meson or cmake, user will need these tools to be installed in order to compile GCC, while autotools doesn't have such a requirement.

                    On the other hand, generating tons of bash code hurts performance and portability, even complexity. I don't have lots of experience with devices other than a PC. It would be nice to hear some options outside.
                    CMake

                    Xbmc for example has switched over to cmake in their master branch. They used to use autotools.

                    CMake language looks also like pretty straightforward to use.

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X