If you want smaller binaries, you should probably use -Os. Personally, that's what I've been using for a while now. Can I tell a performance difference since I switched from -O3? Nope. But the machines I use tend to be highly overpowered for the types of tasks they perform anyway. To a degree, the difference between the -O optimizations equates to a very small performance delta for the vast majority of computer users. Of course that's just my 2c. :)
Sean On Sat, 2004-01-10 at 13:02, Richard Leonard wrote: > On Friday 09 January 2004 12:11 pm, Spider wrote: > > > CFLAGS="-march=athlon -O2 -fomit-frame-pointer -pipe" > > > > (-march implies -mcpu, so stating cpu would be redundant) > > i wouldn't suggest -O3 for this system as you are low on CPU cache, > > which means that you'd be far better off with the smaller, tighter, > > binaries of -O2 . > > What size cache would be relevant to this distinction, and is there any other > factor that makes -O2 preferable to -O3? I have a 600MHz PIII (Coppermine) > with 256kB cache, and am using CFLAGS="-march=pentium3 -O3 -pipe > -fomit-frame-pointer". Would I be better off with -O2? > > Thanks for any information. > Regards > Richard > > > > -- > [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list > -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
