Anybody know how gcc does on optimizing c code for speed versus
Microsoft and Borland compilers, especially for pentium and pentium II?
Seth
by Seth Van Oor » Mon, 07 Jun 1999 04:00:00
Seth
by Art S. Kage » Tue, 08 Jun 1999 04:00:00
> Anybody know how gcc does on optimizing c code for speed versus
> Microsoft and Borland compilers, especially for pentium and pentium II?
Art S. Kagel
by K Le » Wed, 09 Jun 1999 04:00:00
check out pgcc. i don't have the link handy, but just do a search for
them http://gcc.ml.org.
Steve
by K Le » Wed, 09 Jun 1999 04:00:00
: check out pgcc. i don't have the link handy, but just do a search for
: them http://gcc.ml.org.
what the hell was I smoking? I say I don't have the link handy, and then
give you the exact url... anyway, check it out :)
Steve
by Art S. Kage » Wed, 09 Jun 1999 04:00:00
//sunsite.auc.dk/linuxgames/articles/tropea_compilers.html
It basically show that GCC is not as good on Pentium as PGCC which is
not as good as EGCS and all are better than Watcom. The entire
benchmark is scaled versus MS C so you can see the comparison with that
immediately. Bottom line is the GCC variants are better at floating
point, and especially FP emulation and calculations, but not as good
otherwise. It is interesting to note that with optimizations invoked
the GCC variants blow Watcom off and that is a well respected compiler.
It also raises the question: If Watcom and GCC cannot beat MS what
optimizations for Intel CPUs does MS know about that us mortals do not?
> > Anybody know how gcc does on optimizing c code for speed versus
> > Microsoft and Borland compilers, especially for pentium and pentium II?
> Check out the DJGPP Home pages at www.delorie.com. DJGPP is a 32bit
> port of gcc to the MS-DOS environment. There should be information
> there about comparisons between DJGPP and MSCPP and BCPP.
by Seth Van Oor » Wed, 09 Jun 1999 04:00:00
Seth
> The benchmark author just send me an update via email that the Linux
> Games Development Center has posted his results in their WEB Site:
> //sunsite.auc.dk/linuxgames/articles/tropea_compilers.html
> It basically show that GCC is not as good on Pentium as PGCC which is
> not as good as EGCS and all are better than Watcom. The entire
> benchmark is scaled versus MS C so you can see the comparison with that
> immediately. Bottom line is the GCC variants are better at floating
> point, and especially FP emulation and calculations, but not as good
> otherwise. It is interesting to note that with optimizations invoked
> the GCC variants blow Watcom off and that is a well respected compiler.
> It also raises the question: If Watcom and GCC cannot beat MS what
> optimizations for Intel CPUs does MS know about that us mortals do not?
> > > Anybody know how gcc does on optimizing c code for speed versus
> > > Microsoft and Borland compilers, especially for pentium and pentium II?
> > Check out the DJGPP Home pages at www.delorie.com. DJGPP is a 32bit
> > port of gcc to the MS-DOS environment. There should be information
> > there about comparisons between DJGPP and MSCPP and BCPP.
> Art S. Kagel
by Seth Van Oor » Wed, 09 Jun 1999 04:00:00
Seth
> The benchmark author just send me an update via email that the Linux
> Games Development Center has posted his results in their WEB Site:
> //sunsite.auc.dk/linuxgames/articles/tropea_compilers.html
> It basically show that GCC is not as good on Pentium as PGCC which is
> not as good as EGCS and all are better than Watcom. The entire
> benchmark is scaled versus MS C so you can see the comparison with that
> immediately. Bottom line is the GCC variants are better at floating
> point, and especially FP emulation and calculations, but not as good
> otherwise. It is interesting to note that with optimizations invoked
> the GCC variants blow Watcom off and that is a well respected compiler.
> It also raises the question: If Watcom and GCC cannot beat MS what
> optimizations for Intel CPUs does MS know about that us mortals do not?
> > > Anybody know how gcc does on optimizing c code for speed versus
> > > Microsoft and Borland compilers, especially for pentium and pentium II?
> > Check out the DJGPP Home pages at www.delorie.com. DJGPP is a 32bit
> > port of gcc to the MS-DOS environment. There should be information
> > there about comparisons between DJGPP and MSCPP and BCPP.
> Art S. Kagel
by Paul F. Ku » Thu, 10 Jun 1999 04:00:00
YMMV, but for our simulation program compiled with VC++ 6.0 on NTQuote:> > Anybody know how gcc does on optimizing c code for speed versus
> > Microsoft and Borland compilers, especially for pentium and pentium II?
--
Stanford Linear Accelerator Center, Stanford University
Voice: (650) 926-2884 Fax: (650) 926-4335
by Christopher Mahmoo » Fri, 11 Jun 1999 04:00:00
I don't know if it's that simple though. It seems like the gcc people understandQuote:> It also raises the question: If Watcom and GCC cannot beat MS what
> optimizations for Intel CPUs does MS know about that us mortals do not?
Did anyone hear any specifics about a settlement between Borland and
Microsoft? The accusation was that Borland felt Microsoft was aggressively
recruiting their senior programmers and diluting their staff. Using my
intuition -- I would assume this false because I have not seen any evidence
of improvement in Microsoft products recently. Any thoughts?
2. Solaris 1.1.2: Routing, redirects
3. Is there aIntegrated Development Tool like Borland C++, Borland J++ for linux?
5. Who will win? Borland or Microsoft or Programmers?
7. WABI & Microsoft C++/Borland C++
8. screwed permissions! how to fix???
9. They both suck! (was: Borland or Microsoft compilers ?)
10. A soluation for Microsoft vs. DOJ was: Microsoft, a Public Utility
11. Linux vs OS2 vs NT vs Win95 vs Multics vs PDP11 vs BSD geeks
13. Apogee C/C++ vs gcc vs ...