Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sun, 13 Mar 2011 12:19:01 -0700 (PDT)
From:      Jakub Lach <jakub_lach@mailplus.pl>
To:        freebsd-current@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: FreeBSD Compiler Benchmark: gcc-base vs. gcc-ports vs. clang
Message-ID:  <31138978.post@talk.nabble.com>
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTinOrNfq5FBOPkXcExjN=mzZCKazxeG8BMJNFVer@mail.gmail.com>
References:  <4D7943B1.1030604@FreeBSD.org> <90325.1299852096@critter.freebsd.dk> <4D7A42CC.8020807@FreeBSD.org> <98496.1299861978@critter.freebsd.dk> <4D7B44AF.7040406@FreeBSD.org> <60071.1299936937@critter.freebsd.dk> <AANLkTinOrNfq5FBOPkXcExjN=mzZCKazxeG8BMJNFVer@mail.gmail.com>

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


Vin=C3=ADcius Zavam wrote:
>=20
>=20
> i'm still curious about things like CPUTYPE=3D and -march=3D configured a=
s
> native, gentlemen.
> is it the "golden egg" to use with our system or not? why "natives"
> aren't in the benchs?
>=20
> /me feels confused.
>=20
>=20
> --=20
> Vin=C3=ADcius Zavam
> profiles.google.com/egypcio
>=20

Apparently -march=3Dnative would equal -march=3Dcore2
with 65nm generation Core2s, this is not the case with
Penryns.. But there are none in the test?=20

However, I agree that testing with -march=3Dnative
would be simpler and more straightforward.

regards,=20
- Jakub Lach
--=20
View this message in context: http://old.nabble.com/FreeBSD-Compiler-Benchm=
ark%3A-gcc-base-vs.-gcc-ports-vs.-clang-tp31119986p31138978.html
Sent from the freebsd-current mailing list archive at Nabble.com.




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?31138978.post>