Overview
Examples
Screenshots
Comparisons
Applications
Download
Documentation
Tutorials
Bazaar
Status & Roadmap
FAQ
Authors & License
Forums
Funding Ultimate++
Search on this site
Search in forums












SourceForge.net Logo
Home » Community » U++ community news and announcements » New Core
Re: New Core [message #46502 is a reply to message #46469] Tue, 17 May 2016 11:18 Go to previous messageGo to previous message
cbpporter is currently offline  cbpporter
Messages: 1401
Registered: September 2007
Ultimate Contributor
cbpporter wrote on Fri, 13 May 2016 18:05
cbpporter wrote on Fri, 13 May 2016 17:48
I've been slightly reluctant with the changes since I'm suing an older compiler.

And while I'm not sure I'll switch over to the new core, I'm done with the old compiler. In some micro benchmarks with VS2010, my code runs 4 times slower than with MINGW with 100000 iterations.

So I'm done with VS2010 Laughing Laughing .

Well, MSC11 is not any better than 10.

I'll try the latest MSC on Monday.

But can actually MINGW or TDM or whatever is called be actually so good at optimizing my code or is there something else going on?


Quote:

But can actually MINGW or TDM or whatever is called be actually so good at optimizing my code or is there something else going on?


Nope, of course not. While I have full respect for GCC and it's family, I am yet to see a it have a 2 to 4 times better performance in the generated code than it's competitors.

Changing compilers around and having the same bad performance led me to disregard what is changing as a non-contributing factor and focus my attention on what was constant.

And I was right: it was TheIDE. The settings for "Optimal" cause the performance degrade. Switching to speed makes the performance be roughly equal to TDM with Optimal. But TDM with Speed is even faster.

So what is up with "Optimal". I can see that it uses /O1. That is the option for "optimized for speed" from MSC. MSC recommends /O2 for release builds. Why does Optimal do /O1 and what is the difference then between Optimal and Size.


And more importantly: why was I compiling with "Optimal" for years now?

Good thing that I caught it. I was just about to write a blog post detailing the horrible performance of MSC10 and singing the praises of GCC. I would have made a fool of myself publicly when no one else could have gotten the same results in the benchmarks Smile.

Report message to a moderator

[Message index]
 
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Previous Topic: Core: New String methods
Next Topic: ide: Optimal mode removed
Goto Forum:
  

[ Syndicate this forum (XML) ] [ RSS ] [ PDF ]

Current Time: Tue May 07 06:57:24 CEST 2024

Total time taken to generate the page: 0.02166 seconds
.:: Contact :: Home ::.

Powered by: FUDforum 3.0.5.
Copyright ©2001-2013 FUDforum Bulletin Board Software