Re: gcc vs HP C ?
- From: Michael Kraemer <M.Kraemer@xxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 07 Feb 2008 06:12:44 +0100
Rick Jones schrieb:
Michael Kraemer <M.Kraemer@xxxxxx> wrote:
hello group,
I have a C360 running UX 11.0.
I happen to have the native HP ansi cc
(swinstall says version 11.11.06)
as well as gcc 4.0.2.
I compile with -O for both compilers.
When I run number crunching, however,
gcc code runs faster by 10 to 40 percent than
the native cc. Using +O3 and +DA2.0 doesn't change a bit.
HP beaten at the home front ?
Perhaps. It might do better if you let it use PBO and/or +O4. I
don't recall how old either 11.11.06 or 4.0.2 are to know if they
were/are "contemporaries"
Both are not brand new, but 21st century at least.
The usual "have you checked for patches" song and dance might apply.
RTFM not only once or twice but thrice sometimes applies.
"cc -fast"
summarizes a couple of performance switches which reverts the situation.
Now cc is faster by the same ratio.
.
- References:
- gcc vs HP C ?
- From: Michael Kraemer
- Re: gcc vs HP C ?
- From: Rick Jones
- gcc vs HP C ?
- Prev by Date: Re: swinstall error : Could not apply the software selection "vnc"
- Next by Date: Re: swinstall error : Could not apply the software selection "vnc"
- Previous by thread: Re: gcc vs HP C ?
- Next by thread: swinstall error : Could not apply the software selection "vnc"
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
|