Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Tue, 24 May 2005 14:00:26 -0700
From:      Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org>
To:        Bohdan Horst <nexus@hoth.amu.edu.pl>
Cc:        freebsd-stable@freebsd.org, Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org>
Subject:   Re: Performance of 4.x vs 5.x (nbench results)
Message-ID:  <20050524210026.GA28898@xor.obsecurity.org>
In-Reply-To: <20050524205609.GC35326@aristo>
References:  <20050524193117.GA35326@aristo> <20050524193707.GA11906@xor.obsecurity.org> <20050524201701.GB35326@aristo> <20050524202118.GB28257@xor.obsecurity.org> <20050524205609.GC35326@aristo>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help

--jI8keyz6grp/JLjh
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Tue, May 24, 2005 at 10:56:09PM +0200, Bohdan Horst wrote:
> On Tue, May 24, 2005 at 01:21:19PM -0700, Kris Kennaway wrote:
> > On Tue, May 24, 2005 at 10:17:01PM +0200, Bohdan Horst wrote:
> > > On Tue, May 24, 2005 at 12:37:08PM -0700, Kris Kennaway wrote:
> > > >=20
> >=20
> > OK, it might be trustable..but you're still testing gcc 2/gcc 3 as
> > pointed out by another poster.  If you use the same 4.x binaries on
> > both machines it might be better.
>=20
>=20
> NUMERIC SORT:  4.11=3D 499.52 494.31  5.4=3D 451.26 449.7   5.4O=3D 491.6=
6 492.53
> STRING SORT:   4.11=3D 24.13  24.11   5.4=3D 25.286 25.294  5.4O=3D 24.20=
6 24.213
> BITFIELD(e+8)  4.11=3D 1.133  1.1319  5.4=3D 1.1239 1.1239  5.4O=3D 1.135=
8 1.1358
> FP EMULATION   4.11=3D 18.951 18.755  5.4=3D 25.044 25.029  5.4O=3D 18.81=
8 18.818
> FOURIER        4.11=3D 5361   5356.3  5.4=3D 5076.3 5076.3  5.4O=3D 5577 =
  5577
> ASSIGNMENT     4.11=3D 5.4795 5.4469  5.4=3D 5.8986 5.8968  5.4O=3D 5.481=
  5.4763
> IDEA           4.11=3D 595.23 592.13  5.4=3D 660.65 660.65  5.4O=3D 593.9=
1 593.83
> HUFFMAN        4.11=3D 332.47 330.91  5.4=3D 409.06 408.95  5.4O=3D 333.1=
6 333.16
> NEURAL NET     4.11=3D 7.0374 6.9882  5.4=3D 7.2976 7.2955  5.4O=3D 7.033=
  7.0201
> LU DECOMP.     4.11=3D 225.94 226.76  5.4=3D 211.56 210.84  5.4O=3D 219.4=
1 220.15
> original:
> INTEGER INDEX  4.11=3D 12.305 12.238  5.4=3D 13.409 13.400  5.4O=3D 12.27=
5 12.277
> FLOATING-POINT 4.11=3D 9.309  9.296   5.4=3D 9.052  9.041   5.4O=3D 9.339=
  9.344
> new:
> MEMORY INDEX   4.11=3D 3.321  3.313   5.4=3D 3.448  3.448   5.4O=3D 3.328=
  3.327
> INTEGER INDEX  4.11=3D 2.895  2.873   5.4=3D 3.271  3.268   5.4O=3D 2.878=
  2.880
> FLOATING-POINT 4.11=3D 5.163  5.156   5.4=3D 5.020  5.014   5.4O=3D 5.180=
  5.182
>=20
> (5.4O =3D=3D 4.11 binary on 5.4R)
>=20
> almost identical speed :)

Yeah, that's pretty much expected since these are userland benchmarks
(but still good to confirm!)

Kris
--jI8keyz6grp/JLjh
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
Content-Disposition: inline

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (FreeBSD)

iD8DBQFCk5XqWry0BWjoQKURAiE+AKD0OOLMH6MqAQ5T4lN5m307WTDOzQCg10TZ
O0HveLxsmuGwp/LpgU6YO5I=
=W9P9
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--jI8keyz6grp/JLjh--



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20050524210026.GA28898>