Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 7th Oct 2010 19:10 UTC, submitted by tyrione
General Development LLVM 2.8 has been released. The release notes describe this new, ehm, release in greater detail, so head on over and give it a read.
Thread beginning with comment 444541
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[3]: GCC > LLVM
by nt_jerkface on Fri 8th Oct 2010 18:18 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: GCC > LLVM"
nt_jerkface
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.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[4]: GCC > LLVM
by Neolander on Fri 8th Oct 2010 18:44 in reply to "RE[3]: GCC > LLVM"
Neolander Member since:
2010-03-08

A lot of these are outdated. They use GCC 4.3, 4.2, and, would you believe it, one (clamAV) even uses GCC 3.4 ! ^^'

The sole test using up-to-date GCC is the 2010 one, and it shows that GCC 4.5 is often pretty close to ICC in terms of performance, although compilation is much slower.

Two concerns :
-This was a svn, pre-beta build of GCC, so compilation performance has probably improved a bit (though one should test this).
-Also, I would like to know how code generated by ICC behaves on AMD processors.

You do have a point about ICC not being outdated, and being faster on at least some Intel processors, though.

Edited 2010-10-08 18:48 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[5]: GCC > LLVM
by nt_jerkface on Fri 8th Oct 2010 19:13 in reply to "RE[4]: GCC > LLVM"
nt_jerkface Member since:
2009-08-26

A lot of these are outdated. They use GCC 4.3, 4.2, and, would you believe it, one (clamAV) even uses GCC 3.4 ! ^^'

The sole test using up-to-date GCC is the 2010 one, and it shows that GCC 4.5 is often pretty close to ICC in terms of performance, although compilation is much slower.


It at least shows that the common belief is well founded. If you want to find and show some newer benchmarks then by all means please do, I don't have an emotional attachment to any compiler.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[4]: GCC > LLVM
by Valhalla on Fri 8th Oct 2010 19:21 in reply to "RE[3]: GCC > LLVM"
Valhalla Member since:
2006-01-24

Talk is cheap, real benchmarks are more telling.
Here's another from 2010:
http://macles.blogspot.com/2010/08/intel-atom-icc-gcc-clang.html

Finally one that is relevant. Gcc 4.5 has been out for quite a while now and Gcc 4.6 is reaching end of stage one this month. Very impressive results for ICC on the pi_fftc6 test.

This looks good for gcc since Intel recently hired longtime gcc developers CodeSourcery to work on (amongst other things) improving optimizations for the core ix range in gcc.

edit: oh, and here is the latest (ever?) smackdown if anyone is interested, still quite outdated though:
http://multimedia.cx/eggs/compiler-smackdown-2010-1-64-bit/

Edited 2010-10-08 19:24 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2