Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2012 20:41:38 +0200 (CEST) From: Wojciech Puchar <wojtek@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl> To: Joe Gain <joe.gain@gmail.com> Cc: Stas Verberkt <legolas@legolasweb.nl>, freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Why Clang Message-ID: <alpine.BSF.2.00.1206212039450.16530@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl> In-Reply-To: <CAO6-GAdTcEAe9fp3nKe=7wKvNh_JM%2BY%2B__9Rhd3tgR7CVtryWA@mail.gmail.com> References: <402199FE-380B-41B6-866B-7D5D66C457D5@lpthe.jussieu.fr> <CAH3a3KWKNF5Bt-8=KgtbMh=rV6GfUO7OaeE6-SutxkcRe8cG3Q@mail.gmail.com> <alpine.BSF.2.00.1206191953280.8234@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl> <20120621015237.GB58187@neutralgood.org> <AC6A916E-066B-4399-89E1-90C2394327E7@lpthe.jussieu.fr> <4FE35208.40708@queernet.org> <alpine.BSF.2.00.1206211907470.4170@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl> <4FE35616.9080304@queernet.org> <alpine.BSF.2.00.1206211916060.4170@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl> <op.wf9j6hw834t2sn@tech304> <a66129cd8eca4a9fc311b5cc6f8c90a2@homey.local> <CAO6-GAdTcEAe9fp3nKe=7wKvNh_JM%2BY%2B__9Rhd3tgR7CVtryWA@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> > So, has anyone compared the performance of clang vs gcc compiled in daily use-- > for example as a server? Anyone can cherry pick a couple of binaries, but how > important is this for the performance of FreeBSD world? not big, as with almost any compiler. Most workload are dominated by cache misses and jump misprediction. That's why my gzip comparision resulted in minimally worse clang-compiled one (1% or less), while f2c converted fortran code for scientific calculations showed large differences. i expect large difference in eg. cjpeg, lame etc and rather small in for eg. perl
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?alpine.BSF.2.00.1206212039450.16530>