Re: [gentoo-user] Intel C++ compiler ICC
Harald Arnesen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Matthew Kennedy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > What is exactely the benefit of ICC ? >>> >>> It produces _much_ faster code than gcc (even the very latest 3.4-stuff) >>> for most applications I have tested. >> >> Curious... can I compile the Linux kernel and GLIBC with it? I guess >> thats were most applications spend a lot of time. > > Not necessarily. What about a number-crunching application without many > system calls? What number crunching application? ;) -- Matthew Kennedy Gentoo Linux Developer Bugs go to http://bugs.gentoo.org! -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Intel C++ compiler ICC
Matthew Kennedy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >>> What is exactely the benefit of ICC ? >> >> It produces _much_ faster code than gcc (even the very latest 3.4-stuff) >> for most applications I have tested. > > Curious... can I compile the Linux kernel and GLIBC with it? I guess > thats were most applications spend a lot of time. Not necessarily. What about a number-crunching application without many system calls? -- Hilsen Harald. -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Intel C++ compiler ICC
Harald Arnesen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Martin LORANG <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > >> What is exactely the benefit of ICC ? > > It produces _much_ faster code than gcc (even the very latest 3.4-stuff) > for most applications I have tested. Curious... can I compile the Linux kernel and GLIBC with it? I guess thats were most applications spend a lot of time. -- Matthew Kennedy Gentoo Linux Developer Bugs go to http://bugs.gentoo.org! -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Intel C++ compiler ICC
I googled a bit today and found out that some people have tried this too. But they hadn't much success. Maybe the latest version of icc is more gcc compatible than older ones. In the gentoo forum you can find a discussion about that topic. MfG Michael Brian Budge wrote: I've thought of doing something like that too... building the whole system using icc. Has anyone done this? I'd be slightly worried that some of the builds written in C++ wouldn't compile. Brian On Wed, 2 Jul 2003, Michael Gruetzner wrote: That sounds ok to me. But how can I find out what ebuilds support icc. I'd like to try some others than povray. Maybe QT or KDE woul be good but I'm not sure if this will work - probably not :-( . Michael Brian Budge wrote: ICC can produce faster code, but it won't always... It tends to be about 5% faster on my own path tracer. One thing to note is that there are several compiler options for optimization. There are things like global interprocedural opts, even interfile opts, and you can also compile using statistics from previous runs (to aid branch prediction, etc...). I would say that most of the time, ICC produces slightly faster code. My argument is that GCC can do things from the C++ standard that ICC cannot, like partial template specialization. Brian On Wed, 2 Jul 2003, Michael Gruetzner wrote: Harald Arnesen wrote: Martin LORANG <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: What is exactely the benefit of ICC ? It produces _much_ faster code than gcc (even the very latest 3.4-stuff) for most applications I have tested. I just testet it with povray. The gcc compiled version of povray is faster than the icc version. These are the scenes I tested: /usr/share/povray/scenes/balcony/balcony.pov gcc: 125s icc: 190s /usr/share/povray/scenes/abyss.pov gcc: 23s icc: 23s So I don't think, that icc produces faster code. Michael -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list -- # Basic IBM dingbats, some of which will never have a purpose clear # to mankind 2.4.0 linux/drivers/char/cp437.uni -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Intel C++ compiler ICC
I've thought of doing something like that too... building the whole system using icc. Has anyone done this? I'd be slightly worried that some of the builds written in C++ wouldn't compile. Brian On Wed, 2 Jul 2003, Michael Gruetzner wrote: > That sounds ok to me. But how can I find out what ebuilds support icc. > I'd like to try some others than povray. Maybe QT or KDE woul be good > but I'm not sure if this will work - probably not :-( . > > Michael > > Brian Budge wrote: > > ICC can produce faster code, but it won't always... It tends to be about > > 5% faster on my own > > path tracer. One thing to note is that there are several compiler options > > for optimization. There are things like global interprocedural opts, even > > interfile opts, and you can also compile using statistics from previous > > runs (to aid branch prediction, etc...). > > > > I would say that most of the time, ICC produces slightly faster code. My > > argument is that GCC can do things from the C++ standard that ICC cannot, > > like partial template specialization. > > > > Brian > > > > On Wed, 2 Jul 2003, Michael Gruetzner wrote: > > > > > >>Harald Arnesen wrote: > >> > >>>Martin LORANG <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > >>> > >>> > >>> > What is exactely the benefit of ICC ? > >>> > >>> > >>>It produces _much_ faster code than gcc (even the very latest 3.4-stuff) > >>>for most applications I have tested. > >> > >>I just testet it with povray. The gcc compiled version of povray is > >>faster than the icc version. > >>These are the scenes I tested: > >> > >>/usr/share/povray/scenes/balcony/balcony.pov > >> > >>gcc: 125s > >>icc: 190s > >> > >>/usr/share/povray/scenes/abyss.pov > >> > >>gcc: 23s > >>icc: 23s > >> > >>So I don't think, that icc produces faster code. > >> > >>Michael > >> > >> > > > > > > > > -- > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list > > > > > > > -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Intel C++ compiler ICC
That sounds ok to me. But how can I find out what ebuilds support icc. I'd like to try some others than povray. Maybe QT or KDE woul be good but I'm not sure if this will work - probably not :-( . Michael Brian Budge wrote: ICC can produce faster code, but it won't always... It tends to be about 5% faster on my own path tracer. One thing to note is that there are several compiler options for optimization. There are things like global interprocedural opts, even interfile opts, and you can also compile using statistics from previous runs (to aid branch prediction, etc...). I would say that most of the time, ICC produces slightly faster code. My argument is that GCC can do things from the C++ standard that ICC cannot, like partial template specialization. Brian On Wed, 2 Jul 2003, Michael Gruetzner wrote: Harald Arnesen wrote: Martin LORANG <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: What is exactely the benefit of ICC ? It produces _much_ faster code than gcc (even the very latest 3.4-stuff) for most applications I have tested. I just testet it with povray. The gcc compiled version of povray is faster than the icc version. These are the scenes I tested: /usr/share/povray/scenes/balcony/balcony.pov gcc: 125s icc: 190s /usr/share/povray/scenes/abyss.pov gcc: 23s icc: 23s So I don't think, that icc produces faster code. Michael -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list -- # Basic IBM dingbats, some of which will never have a purpose clear # to mankind 2.4.0 linux/drivers/char/cp437.uni -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Intel C++ compiler ICC
ICC can produce faster code, but it won't always... It tends to be about 5% faster on my own path tracer. One thing to note is that there are several compiler options for optimization. There are things like global interprocedural opts, even interfile opts, and you can also compile using statistics from previous runs (to aid branch prediction, etc...). I would say that most of the time, ICC produces slightly faster code. My argument is that GCC can do things from the C++ standard that ICC cannot, like partial template specialization. Brian On Wed, 2 Jul 2003, Michael Gruetzner wrote: > Harald Arnesen wrote: > > Martin LORANG <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > > > >>What is exactely the benefit of ICC ? > > > > > > It produces _much_ faster code than gcc (even the very latest 3.4-stuff) > > for most applications I have tested. > > I just testet it with povray. The gcc compiled version of povray is > faster than the icc version. > These are the scenes I tested: > > /usr/share/povray/scenes/balcony/balcony.pov > > gcc: 125s > icc: 190s > > /usr/share/povray/scenes/abyss.pov > > gcc: 23s > icc: 23s > > So I don't think, that icc produces faster code. > > Michael > > -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Intel C++ compiler ICC
Harald Arnesen wrote: Martin LORANG <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: What is exactely the benefit of ICC ? It produces _much_ faster code than gcc (even the very latest 3.4-stuff) for most applications I have tested. I just testet it with povray. The gcc compiled version of povray is faster than the icc version. These are the scenes I tested: /usr/share/povray/scenes/balcony/balcony.pov gcc: 125s icc: 190s /usr/share/povray/scenes/abyss.pov gcc: 23s icc: 23s So I don't think, that icc produces faster code. Michael -- # Basic IBM dingbats, some of which will never have a purpose clear # to mankind 2.4.0 linux/drivers/char/cp437.uni -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Intel C++ compiler ICC
Harald Arnesen wrote: Martin LORANG <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: What is exactely the benefit of ICC ? It produces _much_ faster code than gcc (even the very latest 3.4-stuff) for most applications I have tested. How can I switch from gcc to icc? Can I do this with gcc-config? MfG Michael -- /* vsprintf.c -- Lars Wirzenius & Linus Torvalds. */ * * Wirzenius wrote this portably, Torvalds fucked it up :-) */ 2.2.16 /usr/src/linux/lib/vsprintf.c -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Intel C++ compiler ICC
Brian Budge <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> > What is exactely the benefit of ICC ? >> >> It produces _much_ faster code than gcc (even the very latest 3.4-stuff) >> for most applications I have tested. > Interesting... what flags were you using for the two compilers? Which > version of ICC where you using? > > I haven't noticed more than maybe a 10% difference, and I like the ability > to use the more standards compliant gcc... I used '-O3 -march=pentium2' on both compilers. ICC 7.1 build 20030307Z. One of my test programs is the SimH VAX-emulator. It runs about 15 percent faster when compiled with ICC, which is very noticable. My implementation of Bruce Schneier's Solitaire encryption algorithm also runs much faster. Is it worth it? In some cases yes, in some cases no. As to which is more standards compliant, I wouldn't know. They seem about equal when it comes to C, and I don't use C++. -- Hilsen Harald. -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Intel C++ compiler ICC
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Wednesday 02 July 2003 02:30, Harald Arnesen wrote: > Martin LORANG <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > What is exactely the benefit of ICC ? > > It produces _much_ faster code than gcc (even the very latest 3.4-stuff) > for most applications I have tested. And in addition compile-time is 30-35% of gcc's. Definitely would be great being able to compile kde in 1/3rd the time... - --Erik -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.2.2 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQE/AmjWds9m9uhAobARAhEDAJoDlXzRLc8VVnMIw/vO/Cj31KHOmQCgomg2 zEgjwAt2/BMentINxgylNX8= =cQcS -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Intel C++ compiler ICC
Interesting... what flags were you using for the two compilers? Which version of ICC where you using? I haven't noticed more than maybe a 10% difference, and I like the ability to use the more standards compliant gcc... On Wed, 2 Jul 2003, Harald Arnesen wrote: > Martin LORANG <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > What is exactely the benefit of ICC ? > > It produces _much_ faster code than gcc (even the very latest 3.4-stuff) > for most applications I have tested. > -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Intel C++ compiler ICC
Martin LORANG <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > What is exactely the benefit of ICC ? It produces _much_ faster code than gcc (even the very latest 3.4-stuff) for most applications I have tested. -- Hilsen Harald. -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Intel C++ compiler ICC
ICC is generally pretty compatible with all the gcc compiled libraries. It also CAN be faster, but isn't really all that much faster than the newer versions of gcc. I prefer gcc because it is closer to conforming to the C++ standard... Brian On Wed, 25 Jun 2003, Zack Gilburd wrote: > On Tuesday 24 June 2003 14:40, Martin LORANG wrote: > > Hi all, > > > > Am I right if I say there are only 4 packages that support ICC ? > > I may be totally misunderstanding ICC<, but all C compilers should be able to > compile the same stuff. A software developer shouldn't need to (in the real > world, sometimes they have to) accomodate their code to a certain compiler. > Any package is theoretically compilable with ICC, AFAIK. > > > What is exactely the benefit of ICC ? > > It's faster than GCC on an Intel chip (faster is an understatement) and it > producers nicer code when compiled with an Intel chip. > > -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Intel C++ compiler ICC
On Tuesday 24 June 2003 14:40, Martin LORANG wrote: > Hi all, > > Am I right if I say there are only 4 packages that support ICC ? I may be totally misunderstanding ICC<, but all C compilers should be able to compile the same stuff. A software developer shouldn't need to (in the real world, sometimes they have to) accomodate their code to a certain compiler. Any package is theoretically compilable with ICC, AFAIK. > What is exactely the benefit of ICC ? It's faster than GCC on an Intel chip (faster is an understatement) and it producers nicer code when compiled with an Intel chip. -- Zack Gilburd http://tehunlose.com GnuPG Key ID: A79A45668240AB6C pgp0.pgp Description: signature
[gentoo-user] Intel C++ compiler ICC
Hi all, Am I right if I say there are only 4 packages that support ICC ? app-games/crafty/crafty dev-libs/blitz/blitz dev-libs/boost/boost media-gfx/povray/povray Or is there something wrong with my script ? What is exactely the benefit of ICC ? Martin -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
