Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.programming > #4651 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Ramine <ramine@1.1> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2014-06-29 14:51 -0700 |
| Last post | 2014-06-29 15:14 -0700 |
| Articles | 2 — 1 participant |
Back to article view | Back to comp.programming
FPC 2.6.4 64-it and FPC 2.7.1 64-bit Ramine <ramine@1.1> - 2014-06-29 14:51 -0700
Re: FPC 2.6.4 64-it and FPC 2.7.1 64-bit Ramine <ramine@1.1> - 2014-06-29 15:14 -0700
| From | Ramine <ramine@1.1> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-06-29 14:51 -0700 |
| Subject | FPC 2.6.4 64-it and FPC 2.7.1 64-bit |
| Message-ID | <lopn4g$jh6$1@dont-email.me> |
Hello, I have noticed that FreePascal 2.7.1 64-bit is getting 33% faster than FreePascal 2.6.4 on the scimark2 benchmarks, and i think that it will get much faster in the future, so FreePascal devellopers are doing a good job i think. Here is the scimark2 benchmarks on my Quadcore Q6600: For FreePascal 2.6.4 64-bit we have: Mininum running time = 2.00 seconds Composite Score MFlops: 435.93 FFT Mflops: 269.56 (N=1024) SOR Mflops: 716.75 (100 x 100) MonteCarlo: Mflops: 96.48 Sparse matmult Mflops: 570.65 (N=1000, nz=5000 LU Mflops: 526.20 (M=100, N=100) And for FreePascal 2.7.1 64-bit we have: Mininum running time = 2.00 seconds Composite Score MFlops: 579.50 FFT Mflops: 395.86 (N=1024) SOR Mflops: 721.20 (100 x 100) MonteCarlo: Mflops: 113.03 Sparse matmult Mflops: 814.68 (N=1000, nz=5000) LU Mflops: 852.76 (M=100, N=100) Thank you, Amine Moulay Ramdane.
[toc] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Ramine <ramine@1.1> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-06-29 15:14 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <lopohh$q9d$3@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #4651 |
Hello, I have used full optimization on FreePascal. Thank you, Amine Moulay Ramdane.
[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]
Back to top | Article view | comp.programming
csiph-web