|
From: | Christian Jullien |
Subject: | Re: [Tinycc-devel] i just can't get over how farging fast tcc is... |
Date: | Tue, 6 Mar 2012 16:28:33 +0100 |
Personally, I can’t say that tcc execution speed is close to other C compilers.
Results from my OpenLisp benchmarks (see www.eligis.com)
All tests are run on the same machine.
You can see that TCC (Tiny C Compiler) is always between 3x to 10x slower!!! than gcc and/or VC++.
The "funny" thing is that Lisp compiled code runs slower than interpreter while other C compilers are about twice as fast.
-- Lisp Compiled code to LAP (64bit mode)
GNU GCC 4.x (Mgw) XP64 (Compile) | 1.240
Microsoft C 16.0 XP64 (Compile) | 1.189
Tiny C Compiler XP64 (Compile) | 10.442
-- Lisp Compiled code to LAP (32bit mode)
GNU GCC 4.x (Mgw) XP (Compile) | 1.059
Watcom C 1.90 XP (Compile) | 1.157
Borland C 5.60 XP (Compile) | 1.216
Microsoft C 16.0 XP (Compile) | 1.276
Digital Mars 8.52 XP (Compile) | 1.338
IBM Visual Age C XP (Compile) | 1.419
LCC C Compiler XP (Compile) | 1.609
Tiny C Compiler XP (Compile) | 10.515
-- Lisp interpreted code (64bit mode)
Microsoft C 16.0 XP64 (64 bits) | 1.976
GNU GCC 4.x (Mgw) XP64 (64 bits) | 2.191
Pelles C Compiler XP64 (64 bits) | 2.842
Tiny C Compiler XP64 (64 bits) | 5.771
-- Lisp interpreted code (32bit mode)
Microsoft C 16.0 XP (32 bits) | 1.887
GNU GCC 4.x (Mgw) XP (32 bits) | 2.263
IBM Visual Age C XP (32 bits) | 2.652
Borland C 5.60 XP (32 bits) | 2.713
Watcom C 1.90 XP (32 bits) | 2.746
Pelles C Compiler XP (32 bits) | 3.110
Digital Mars 8.52 XP (32 bits) | 3.512
LCC C Compiler XP (32 bits) | 3.591
Tiny C Compiler XP (32 bits) | 5.688
-----Original Message-----
From: address@hidden [mailto:address@hidden] On Behalf Of address@hidden
Sent: mardi 6 mars 2012 16:06
To: address@hidden
Subject: Re: [Tinycc-devel] i just can't get over how farging fast tcc is...
Hi,
I also always thought tcc doesn't optimize the Code as much as the other Compilers and so the Executables must be significantly slower.
And some of you also posted examples here that are corresponding to this assumption but have you seen the benchmarks by staalmannen on phoronix.com?
Link to the Thread: http://phoronix.com/forums/showthread.php?29090-CompilerDeathMatch-surprising-results
The Results shows that the performance of TCC-Compiled Executables is more than just Comparable to the ones of other Compilers in most Cases it is one of the 5 fastest by for Example the Apache-Benchmark it is the fastest in these Benchmarks.
There are many result-stages in the Thread so look there for more information for a quick overview here is one (where there are not as many compilers like in later ones, but on the later ones you can't see the numbers on the Graphics anymore)
Link: http://global.phoronix-test-suite.com/index.php?k=profile&u=staalmannen-1284-1397-9429
I don't really know how the phoronix-test-suite used for these benchmarks so I don't know how reliable they are, but it was really astonishing!
PS: I just subscribed to this list so i coudn't just reply to the Mail in the Subject. I hope it lands in the right Thread (don't know the Maillist Software either)
--
Empfehlen Sie GMX DSL Ihren Freunden und Bekannten und wir belohnen Sie mit bis zu 50,- Euro! https://freundschaftswerbung.gmx.de
_______________________________________________
Tinycc-devel mailing list
https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/tinycc-devel
[Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread] |