Linked by Thom Holwerda on Fri 20th Feb 2009 15:49 UTC, submitted by Michael
Benchmarks "Earlier this month we published an article looking at the Linux versus OpenSolaris performance when using the new AMD Shanghai Opteron CPUs. Ubuntu Linux was faster than OpenSolaris 2008.11 in nearly all of the tests, but as mentioned in that article, OpenSolaris is still dependent upon GCC 3.4 where as Ubuntu and most other Linux distributions are now shipping with the newer and much-improved GCC 4 series. Following that article being published, Sun Microsystems had requested some compiler tests since they were confident the results would be different had their Sun Studio compiler been used. Well, in this article we now have some OpenSolaris benchmarks from the same AMD setup using GCC 3.4, GCC 4.0, and Sun Studio 12."
Thread beginning with comment 350030
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Compiler benchmarks...
by FellowConspirator on Fri 20th Feb 2009 18:39 UTC
FellowConspirator
Member since:
2007-12-13

The biggest problem with the article is that they are benchmarking the compilation times, not the performance of the resulting code (OK, the first two looked at the performance of the generated executable -- but the rest were measuring how long it took to compile something).

The thesis was that GCC was generating more efficient code and that's why applications were faster under Ubuntu. In fact, their simple benchmarks seem to reflect that, to the extent they tested it, but they don't recognize that.

Who cares if the compiler takes 100 seconds to rather than 60 to compile a project. Whichever generates the fastest running code without error is the winner.

Reply Score: 3

RE: Compiler benchmarks...
by CodeMonkey on Fri 20th Feb 2009 22:16 in reply to "Compiler benchmarks..."
CodeMonkey Member since:
2005-09-22

Who cares if the compiler takes 100 seconds to rather than 60 to compile a project. Whichever generates the fastest running code without error is the winner.


From an end user stand point, this is true. From a developer's stand point, however, compilation time is key to productivity.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[2]: Compiler benchmarks...
by tyrione on Sat 21st Feb 2009 04:58 in reply to "RE: Compiler benchmarks..."
tyrione Member since:
2005-11-21

"Who cares if the compiler takes 100 seconds to rather than 60 to compile a project. Whichever generates the fastest running code without error is the winner.


From an end user stand point, this is true. From a developer's stand point, however, compilation time is key to productivity.
"

I can see it now, ``But Sir! Our build times are cut in half? Who cares if the applications run twice as slow? Is that really my concern?''

Long pause, ``You're right. It's not your concern. Your time is too important to work here. Security will escort you from the premises and you'll get your last 2 weeks by tomorrow.''

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE: Compiler benchmarks...
by gilboa on Sun 22nd Feb 2009 14:49 in reply to "Compiler benchmarks..."
gilboa Member since:
2005-07-06

As far as I could see, only a 1 out of 9 benchmarks was about compilation time.
While less important than other benchmarks (read: actual performance), if you have ever tried to building a (really) huge project project on both GCC (Linux) and VC/CL (Windows), you'll know how it annoying it gets when the Windows build (even with GNU/Make Makes w/ multiple jobs) takes ~3-5 times the time it's takes to build the Linux counter-part. (And I'm being polite)

... Plus, having one useless (?) benchmark doesn't invalidate the rest of thier results.

- Gilboa

Reply Parent Score: 2