From owner-freebsd-amd64@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Mar 16 10:47:24 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 34DC316A423 for ; Thu, 16 Mar 2006 10:47:24 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from joao@matik.com.br) Received: from msrv.matik.com.br (msrv.matik.com.br [200.152.83.14]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8300943D49 for ; Thu, 16 Mar 2006 10:47:23 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from joao@matik.com.br) Received: from anb (anb.matik.com.br [200.152.83.34]) by msrv.matik.com.br (8.13.4/8.13.1) with ESMTP id k2GAlLiP017374; Thu, 16 Mar 2006 07:47:22 -0300 (BRT) (envelope-from joao@matik.com.br) From: JoaoBR To: Peter Wemm Date: Thu, 16 Mar 2006 07:46:59 -0300 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.1 References: <20060313221836.5491916A420@hub.freebsd.org> <346a80220603141520i2ac1a4br66cbfb213453dcd6@mail.gmail.com> <200603151356.27972.peter@wemm.org> In-Reply-To: <200603151356.27972.peter@wemm.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200603160747.00051.joao@matik.com.br> X-Filter-Version: 1.11a (msrv.matik.com.br) X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV version 0.88, clamav-milter version 0.87 on msrv.matik.com.br X-Virus-Status: Clean Cc: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org Subject: Re: amd64 slower than i386 on identical AMD 64 system? / How is hyperthreading handled on amd64? X-BeenThere: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting FreeBSD to the AMD64 platform List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 16 Mar 2006 10:47:24 -0000 On Wednesday 15 March 2006 18:56, Peter Wemm wrote: > I tend to agree with this. ubench is not a useful benchmark for > comparing 32 bit vs 64 bit systems. > > However, what might be interesting is to compile a 32 bit binary (and > statically link it) on the i386 system, and compare the runtime on the > 64 bit kernel, using the same identical binary. That way you are > measuring the same math operations on both platforms. Comparing 64 bit > operations vs 32 bit operations is apples vs oranges. > > Of course, it may still be slower, but at least the results would be > more meaningful. Don't assume the OS is slower because the compiler > makes the application do twice the work. good point=20 what do you think of unixbench since it does some real-life tasks? Jo=E3o A mensagem foi scaneada pelo sistema de e-mail e pode ser considerada segura. Service fornecido pelo Datacenter Matik https://datacenter.matik.com.br