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
VinÃcius Zavam wrote: > > > i'm still curious about things like CPUTYPE= and -march= configured as > native, gentlemen. > is it the "golden egg" to use with our system or not? why "natives" > aren't in the benchs? > > /me feels confused. > > > -- > VinÃcius Zavam > profiles.google.com/egypcio > Apparently -march=native would equal -march=core2 with 65nm generation Core2s, this is not the case with Penryns.. But there are none in the test? However, I agree that testing with -march=native would be simpler and more straightforward. regards, - Jakub Lach -- View this message in context: http://old.nabble.com/FreeBSD-Compiler-Benchmark%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>