Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 7th Oct 2010 19:10 UTC, submitted by tyrione
Permalink for comment 444541
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Features
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/13/13 14:35 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/11/13 17:07 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/10/13 23:13 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/08/13 14:57 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/07/13 11:40 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/04/13 12:45 UTC
Linked by nfeske on 05/31/13 10:12 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/29/13 16:59 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/24/13 17:26 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 21:38 UTC
More Features »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2009-08-26
Talk is cheap, real benchmarks are more telling.
The one I provided was from 2009.
Here's another from 2010:
http://macles.blogspot.com/2010/08/intel-atom-icc-gcc-clang.html
Here is another:
http://www.luxrender.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=21&t=603
ffmpeg benchmark:
http://geminialpha.blogspot.com/2008/03/icc-vs-gcc-43.html
Here is someone showing how clamav can be recompiled with icc for a significant performance boost:
http://groups.google.com/group/linuxdna/browse_thread/thread/36a354...
I see no reason why I should believe that GCC will create a faster binary in most cases. But if you would like to convince me otherwise then pick some commonly used open source programs and create your own benchmarks.