Re: ccc vs. gcc today
On Tue, Dec 02, 2003 at 02:40:54AM -0800, Phil Carmody wrote:
> --- John Goerzen <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> > I'm interested in how ccc and gcc compare today wrt speed of generated
> > code on Alpha. Is gcc 3.3 as good as ccc?
> For 21164s, building Dan Bernstein's DJBFFT library, ccc produces
> noticably faster code than gcc-3.3. At least 5% faster across the
> board, up to 50% faster for some functions.
Does this hold even for things that are not directly math-related?
Here's why I ask. I have done some experimentation and concluded that
my video card is not the source of my performance problems with X.
(Running programs over an ssh X tunnel from my laptop -- even over
11Mbps wireless networking -- is noticably faster than running the same
programs on my 164LX directly.)
Also, my Alpha's performance in X is a lot slower than a 700MHz PC I
have sitting around (that PC also supports only PCI cards), despite the
fact that just about everything about the Alpha is faster (10,000RPM UW
SCSI disks in RAID-0 vs. single 7500RPM IDE drive, etc, etc.) I'm
hoping that optimizing programs for the Alpha will help.
I'm using apt-build right now to build some key libraries with
-mcpu=ev56 -O3 and hope that'll do the trick, but at the same time, I'm
wondering if ccc would do better -- and how easy it is to use it in
place of gcc.