Re: [Fed-Talk] Compilers
Re: [Fed-Talk] Compilers
- Subject: Re: [Fed-Talk] Compilers
- From: Brian Raymond <email@hidden>
- Date: Mon, 09 May 2005 09:06:56 -0400
On 5/9/05 8:03 AM, "Michael Kluskens" <email@hidden> wrote:
> I've discovered that a certain unnamed commercial Z compiler can
> produce executables that are as much as 2.5x slower than another
> compiler for the same Z language (at maximum optimization).
>
When I read this it left me wondering exactly what your goal is, that being
"show that a G4 or G5 is faster" within your organization or publicly? For
your claims that Z compiler is 2.5 slower then another, is that from testing
on just PowerPC or are you referring to the difference between that and x86?
I assume you mean across platforms because otherwise you wouldn't have the
problem you do.
> It's very hard to show that a G4 or G5 is faster than the same speed
> Pentium with that sort of handicap.
Depending on what type of Pentium you are referring to here (Xeon I
imagine?) and what type of calculations you are trying to do a G4 will
definitely not be faster then the equivalent Xeon. A G5 will however as you
alluded to earlier a lot has to do with the compiler and how the code is
written.
If I were to play devils advocate though, I would ask why aren't you
comparing the best of the G5 against the best of Xeon? It's accepted that
the G5 is faster clock for clock but when you can get Xeon chips at almost
1GHz more then the G5 they compensate with the extra clock cycles.
>
> It's also very hard to justify a particular Z language versus C when
> dealing that kind of handicap. We're an Z shop not C so I don't have
> benchmark C codes (they would have to perform the same functions to be
> useable for us).
_______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Fed-talk mailing list (email@hidden)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
This email sent to email@hidden