From owner-freebsd-chat Sun Jan 5 5:34:55 2003 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AA67C37B401 for ; Sun, 5 Jan 2003 05:34:54 -0800 (PST) Received: from albatross.prod.itd.earthlink.net (albatross.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.120.120]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 24BF643EE1 for ; Sun, 5 Jan 2003 05:34:54 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from rsidd@papagena.rockefeller.edu) Received: from user-0cev12d.cable.mindspring.com ([24.239.132.77] helo=dhcp-906-242) by albatross.prod.itd.earthlink.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 18VAvV-0004ui-02 for chat@FreeBSD.ORG; Sun, 05 Jan 2003 05:34:53 -0800 Received: (qmail 58130 invoked by uid 1001); 5 Jan 2003 13:34:40 -0000 Date: Sun, 5 Jan 2003 08:34:40 -0500 From: Rahul Siddharthan To: Terry Lambert Cc: Greg 'groggy' Lehey , Brett Glass , chat@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Bystander shot by a spam filter Message-ID: <20030105133439.GA55543@papagena.rockefeller.edu> References: <4.3.2.7.2.20030104201251.029387d0@localhost> <4.3.2.7.2.20030104112015.026a5530@localhost> <4.3.2.7.2.20030104201251.029387d0@localhost> <4.3.2.7.2.20030104202908.03c3b100@localhost> <20030105073804.GA72674@wantadilla.lemis.com> <20030105074923.GA4956@papagena.rockefeller.edu> <3E18073C.68182FE4@mindspring.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <3E18073C.68182FE4@mindspring.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i X-Operating-System: FreeBSD 5.0-CURRENT i386 Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Terry Lambert said on Jan 5, 2003 at 02:21:48: > Rahul Siddharthan wrote: > > According to the benchmarks I cited earlier, > > http://www.coyotegulch.com/reviews/intel_comp/intel_gcc_bench2.html > > (look at the SciMark benchmark) > > gcc actually beats intel on the sparse matrix multiply on the > > Pentium IV (which generally emerges as Intel's strong platform) and > > runs it pretty close on LU decomposition. > > That's about the only place that g++ beat Intel C++; almost all > other cases, the Intel averages 20% faster, and that number goes > up to 100% faster for some benchmarks on the P4. The point is, sparse matrix operations and LU decomposition are exactly the cases Brett is talking about. > I guess people should read the referenced page, instead of trusting > summaries in mailing list postings. ;^). I guess people should read my posts properly and do their research R To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message