Groups > comp.programming.threads > #2545

FPC 64-bit 2.7.1

Path	csiph.com!usenet.pasdenom.info!gegeweb.org!eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From	Ramine <ramine@1.1>
Newsgroups	comp.programming, comp.programming.threads
Subject	FPC 64-bit 2.7.1
Date	Sun, 29 Jun 2014 13:06:08 -0700
Organization	A noiseless patient Spider
Lines	59
Message-ID	<loph0e$506$1@dont-email.me> (permalink)
Mime-Version	1.0
Content-Type	text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding	7bit
Injection-Date	Sun, 29 Jun 2014 17:05:18 +0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info	mx05.eternal-september.org; posting-host="518d70aeead21e0a1a15f1c91bb07e09"; logging-data="5126"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/n6W/j1XFhNogG/1ynMKof"
User-Agent	Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.0; WOW64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.6.0
Cancel-Lock	sha1:YUynReFWKu9JgKzXy2KHdQEuRXk=
Xref	csiph.com comp.programming:4648 comp.programming.threads:2545

Cross-posted to 2 groups.

Show key headers only | View raw

Hello,

I have benchmarked FPC 2.7.1 64-bit against the newest version
of tdm-gcc 64-bit and the FreePascal scimark2 benchmark is much better:


Here is the scimark2 results on my Quadcore Q6600:


FPC 2.7.1 64-bit gives:

Mininum running time = 2.00 seconds
Composite Score MFlops:   578.95
FFT             Mflops:   393.07    (N=1024)
SOR             Mflops:   717.27    (100 x 100)
MonteCarlo:     Mflops:   113.03
Sparse matmult  Mflops:   814.43    (N=1000, nz=5000)
LU              Mflops:   856.94    (M=100, N=100)


And tdm-gcc 64-bit gives:

Using       2.00 seconds min time per kenel.
Composite Score:          754.95
FFT             Mflops:   664.22    (N=1024)
SOR             Mflops:   720.90    (100 x 100)
MonteCarlo:     Mflops:   223.05
Sparse matmult  Mflops:   985.50    (N=1000, nz=5000)
LU              Mflops:  1181.08    (M=100, N=100)


So  if you have noticed on LU there a 38% difference in performance
and on Sparse matmult there is a 21% difference in performance
and on SOR it's the same performance
and on FFT there is 69% difference in performance.
and on the overall Composite Score there is only 30% difference in 
performance.


So i think that FPC 2.7.1 64-bit is much better and i think
FPC will get much better on performance in the future.

You can download FPC 2.7.1 64-bit from here:

ftp://ftp.freepascal.org/pub/fpc/snapshot/trunk/


FPC 2.7.1 64-bit is much better on scimark benchmark than Delphi XE 64-bit


Thank you,
Amine Moulay Ramdane.

Back to comp.programming.threads | Previous | Next — Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

FPC 64-bit  2.7.1 Ramine <ramine@1.1> - 2014-06-29 13:06 -0700
  Re: FPC 64-bit  2.7.1 Ramine <ramine@1.1> - 2014-06-29 14:20 -0700
    Re: FPC 64-bit  2.7.1 Ramine <ramine@1.1> - 2014-06-29 15:14 -0700
  Re: FPC 64-bit  2.7.1 Ramine <ramine@1.1> - 2014-06-29 14:30 -0700
    Re: FPC 64-bit  2.7.1 JJ <jj4public@vfemail.net> - 2014-06-30 02:46 +0700
      Re: FPC 64-bit  2.7.1 Ramine <ramine@1.1> - 2014-06-29 16:18 -0700
        Re: FPC 64-bit  2.7.1 JJ <jj4public@vfemail.net> - 2014-06-30 14:58 +0700
  Re: FPC 64-bit  2.7.1 Ramine <ramine@1.1> - 2014-06-29 15:14 -0700

csiph-web