gcc 3.1 slower than 2.95?
Harold L Hunt
huntharo@msu.edu
Mon Jun 17 09:20:00 GMT 2002
Marcus,
First, this is probably way off topic for the Cygwin list. You should be
asking on the gcc lists.
However, I can make one comment. In a scientific experiment you only change
one variable each time. However, you changed two:
> -> gcc 2.95
> g++ -O2 -mcpu=pentium -Wall settest.cpp -lwinmm
>
> -> gcc 3.1
> g++ -O3 -mcpu=pentium -Wall settest.cpp -lwinmm
You changed both the compiler (from 2.95 to 3.1) and the optimization flag
(from -O2 to -O3). Don't do that. Make both tests at -O2 or -O3. The -O2
flag seems to be about as high as anyone goes without doing some extensive
analysis on their own to determine if -O3 would be of any benefit. Also, the
-O3 flag can do things that make the code size much larger which can negate
the effect of a processor cache, etc. Stick with -O2 for both tests.
Harold
--
Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Bug reporting: http://cygwin.com/bugs.html
Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
More information about the Cygwin
mailing list