[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[lmi] Benchmarking: gcc-8 beats gcc-10 soundly?
From: |
Greg Chicares |
Subject: |
[lmi] Benchmarking: gcc-8 beats gcc-10 soundly? |
Date: |
Sat, 19 Sep 2020 15:15:48 +0000 |
User-agent: |
Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.11.0 |
It looks like gcc-10 gives us slower lmi binaries. Picking
the third '--selftest' scenario as an index of performance
(results in microseconds--less is better):
gcc-10 gcc-8 ratio
------ ----- -----
102659 84947 1.21 32-bit
50121 37410 1.34 64-bit
The fourth scenario is even worse:
33250 20654 1.61 32-bit
24616 13009 1.89 64-bit
Comparing to the benchmarks here:
https://openbenchmarking.org/result/1912179-HU-COREI759632&obr_sgm=y&obr_vb=y&obr_sgm=y&obr_swl=y&obr_vb=y
lmi fares worse than the worst phoronix scenarios, i.e.,
"libgav1" and "function objects".
Vadim--Does this seem so astonishing that it can't be
true? These results are all observed on the same machine.
The only real difference I can think of is that one is a
new debian bullseye within centos within debian buster chroot
while the other is an
old debian bullseye within debian buster chroot [my old gcc-8]
both of which identify themselves as:
Debian GNU/Linux bullseye/sid
But I've never noticed any penalty before for nested chroots.
The gcc-8 timings above are from "README.branch.patch"
on branch valyuta/002 (pushed to savannah). [Although
the last sentence mentions a branch, all timings in
this email are for 'master'.] Here are the commands
that produced the gcc-10 timings:
/opt/lmi/src/lmi[0]$i686-w64-mingw32-gcc --version
i686-w64-mingw32-gcc (GCC) 10-win32 20200525 [...]
/opt/lmi/src/lmi[0]$x86_64-w64-mingw32-gcc --version
x86_64-w64-mingw32-gcc (GCC) 10-win32 20200525 [...]
/opt/lmi/src/lmi[0]$git switch master
Switched to branch 'master'
Your branch is up to date with 'origin/master'.
/opt/lmi/src/lmi[0]$env |grep LMI_
LMI_COMPILER=gcc
LMI_TRIPLET=i686-w64-mingw32
/opt/lmi/src/lmi[0]$make $coefficiency --output-sync=recurse install
check_physical_closure 2>&1 | tee eraseme | less -SN
/opt/lmi/src/lmi[0]$wine /opt/lmi/bin/lmi_cli_shared.exe --accept
--data_path=/opt/lmi/data --selftest
Test speed:
naic, no solve : 6.965e-02 s mean; 66490 us least of 15 runs
naic, specamt solve : 1.114e-01 s mean; 110625 us least of 9 runs
naic, ee prem solve : 1.030e-01 s mean; 102659 us least of 10 runs
finra, no solve : 3.460e-02 s mean; 33250 us least of 29 runs
finra, specamt solve: 7.337e-02 s mean; 72938 us least of 14 runs
finra, ee prem solve: 6.886e-02 s mean; 68593 us least of 15 runs
/opt/lmi/src/lmi[0]$LMI_COMPILER=gcc ; LMI_TRIPLET=x86_64-w64-mingw32 ; .
/opt/lmi/src/lmi/set_toolchain.sh
/opt/lmi/src/lmi[0]$env |grep LMI_
LMI_COMPILER=gcc
LMI_TRIPLET=x86_64-w64-mingw32
/opt/lmi/src/lmi[0]$make $coefficiency --output-sync=recurse install
check_physical_closure 2>&1 | tee eraseme | less -SN
/opt/lmi/src/lmi[0]$wine /opt/lmi/bin/lmi_cli_shared.exe --accept
--data_path=/opt/lmi/data --selftest
Test speed:
naic, no solve : 3.696e-02 s mean; 36789 us least of 28 runs
naic, specamt solve : 5.340e-02 s mean; 53208 us least of 19 runs
naic, ee prem solve : 5.033e-02 s mean; 50121 us least of 20 runs
finra, no solve : 2.483e-02 s mean; 24616 us least of 41 runs
finra, specamt solve: 3.974e-02 s mean; 39548 us least of 26 runs
finra, ee prem solve: 3.785e-02 s mean; 37684 us least of 27 runs
- [lmi] Benchmarking: gcc-8 beats gcc-10 soundly?,
Greg Chicares <=
Re: [lmi] Benchmarking: gcc-8 beats gcc-10 soundly?, Greg Chicares, 2020/09/20