Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2004 10:32:34 -0800 From: "David O'Brien" <obrien@FreeBSD.org> To: Kenneth Culver <culverk@sweetdreamsracing.biz> Cc: "'freebsd-amd64@FreeBSD.org'" <freebsd-amd64@FreeBSD.org> Subject: Re: Performance comparison, ULE vs 4BSD and AMD64 vs i386 Message-ID: <20040225183234.GG7567@dragon.nuxi.com> In-Reply-To: <20040225110754.hcogcccokg84k44k@www.sweetdreamsracing.biz> References: <1077658664.92943.15.camel@.rochester.rr.com> <20040225110754.hcogcccokg84k44k@www.sweetdreamsracing.biz>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, Feb 25, 2004 at 11:07:54AM -0500, Kenneth Culver wrote: > The buildworld problem could just be because it takes longer for the > compiler to > generate amd64 code. In fact, I'm almost willing to bet that's the case > since > amd64 has 2x the GPR's that x86 does. It's likely that it's harder to > optimize > for it. Does anyone who knows compilers care to comment? s/harder/slower/ It is defineately easier to optimize for amd64 because if its increased # of registers. But I'm not sure even "slower" is a valid claim -- on the i386 the compiler has to do a lot of time figuring out the best way to do the spill code (when, where). -- -- David (obrien@FreeBSD.org)
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20040225183234.GG7567>