Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.programming > #4648 > unrolled thread

FPC 64-bit 2.7.1

Started byRamine <ramine@1.1>
First post2014-06-29 13:06 -0700
Last post2014-06-29 15:14 -0700
Articles 8 — 2 participants

Back to article view | Back to comp.programming

Contents

  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

#4648 — FPC 64-bit 2.7.1

FromRamine <ramine@1.1>
Date2014-06-29 13:06 -0700
SubjectFPC 64-bit 2.7.1
Message-ID<loph0e$506$1@dont-email.me>
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.

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#4649

FromRamine <ramine@1.1>
Date2014-06-29 14:20 -0700
Message-ID<loplc0$616$1@dont-email.me>
In reply to#4648
Hello,


And FreePascal 2.7.1 64-bit is much faster that C# on scimark2 benchmarks.


Here is the results on my Quadcore Q6600:

For C# we have:

Composite Score: 524.25 MFlops
FFT            : 493.56 - (1024)
SOR            : 700.75 - (100x100)
Monte Carlo    :  31.76
Sparse MatMult : 544.97 - (N=1000, nz=5000)
LU             : 850.22 - (100x100)


For FreePascal 2.7.1  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)


Thank you,
Amine Moulay Ramdane.


On 6/29/2014 1:06 PM, Ramine wrote:
>
> 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.
>
>
>
>
>
>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#4653

FromRamine <ramine@1.1>
Date2014-06-29 15:14 -0700
Message-ID<lopoi6$q9d$4@dont-email.me>
In reply to#4649
Hello,

I have used full optimization on C# and FreePascal.


Thank you,
Amine Moulay Ramdane.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#4650

FromRamine <ramine@1.1>
Date2014-06-29 14:30 -0700
Message-ID<loplt2$8tr$1@dont-email.me>
In reply to#4648
Hello,


FreePascal 2.7.1 64-bit is much faster than Delphi XE4 64-bit

Here is the results on my Quadcore Q6600:


For Delphi XE4 64-bit we have:

Mininum running time = 2.00 seconds
Composite Score MFlops:   310.22
FFT             Mflops:   410.41    (N=1024)
SOR             Mflops:   446.88    (100 x 100)
MonteCarlo:     Mflops:   110.83
Sparse matmult  Mflops:  482.42    (N=1000, nz=5000)
LU              Mflops:  1065.42    (M=100, N=100)

For FreePascal 2.7.1 we have:

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)



Thank you,
Amine Moulay Ramdane.



On 6/29/2014 1:06 PM, Ramine wrote:
>
> 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.
>
>
>
>
>
>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#4655

FromJJ <jj4public@vfemail.net>
Date2014-06-30 02:46 +0700
Message-ID<zkkm33vuz2kt.1h1d9047n6rd0.dlg@40tude.net>
In reply to#4650
On Sun, 29 Jun 2014 14:30:10 -0700, Ramine wrote:
> Hello,
> 
> FreePascal 2.7.1 64-bit is much faster than Delphi XE4 64-bit
> 
> Here is the results on my Quadcore Q6600:
> 
> For Delphi XE4 64-bit we have:
> 
> Mininum running time = 2.00 seconds
> Composite Score MFlops:   310.22
> FFT             Mflops:   410.41    (N=1024)
> SOR             Mflops:   446.88    (100 x 100)
> MonteCarlo:     Mflops:   110.83
> Sparse matmult  Mflops:  482.42    (N=1000, nz=5000)
> LU              Mflops:  1065.42    (M=100, N=100)
> 
> For FreePascal 2.7.1 we have:
> 
> 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)
> 
> Thank you,
> Amine Moulay Ramdane.

What about 32-bit compiler comparison between FPC and Delphi XE (any
version)?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#4656

FromRamine <ramine@1.1>
Date2014-06-29 16:18 -0700
Message-ID<lopsac$sgh$1@dont-email.me>
In reply to#4655
On 6/29/2014 12:46 PM, JJ wrote:
> On Sun, 29 Jun 2014 14:30:10 -0700, Ramine wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> FreePascal 2.7.1 64-bit is much faster than Delphi XE4 64-bit
>>
>> Here is the results on my Quadcore Q6600:
>>
>> For Delphi XE4 64-bit we have:
>>
>> Mininum running time = 2.00 seconds
>> Composite Score MFlops:   310.22
>> FFT             Mflops:   410.41    (N=1024)
>> SOR             Mflops:   446.88    (100 x 100)
>> MonteCarlo:     Mflops:   110.83
>> Sparse matmult  Mflops:  482.42    (N=1000, nz=5000)
>> LU              Mflops:  1065.42    (M=100, N=100)
>>
>> For FreePascal 2.7.1 we have:
>>
>> 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)
>>
>> Thank you,
>> Amine Moulay Ramdane.
>
> What about 32-bit compiler comparison between FPC and Delphi XE (any
> version)?


Hello,

Here it is:

FreePascal 2.7.1 32-bit

Mininum running time = 2.00 seconds
Composite Score MFlops:   468.86
FFT             Mflops:   236.54    (N=1024)
SOR             Mflops:   712.89    (100 x 100)
MonteCarlo:     Mflops:    75.36
Sparse matmult  Mflops:   441.47    (N=1000, nz=5000)
LU              Mflops:   878.03    (M=100, N=100)


And Delphi XE4 32-bit

Mininum running time = 2.00 seconds
Composite Score MFlops:   396.12
FFT             Mflops:   233.56    (N=1024)
SOR             Mflops:   708.70    (100 x 100)
MonteCarlo:     Mflops:    75.34
Sparse matmult  Mflops:   243.81    (N=1000, nz=5000)
LU              Mflops:   719.16    (M=100, N=100)

So FreePascal 2.7.1 32-bit is in Composite Score 18% faster
than Delphi XE4 32-bit on the scimark2 benchmark.


And FreePascal 2.7.1 64-bit is in Composite Score 23% faster than
FreePascal 2.7.1 32-bit on then scimark2 benchmark.



Thank you,
Amine Moulay Ramdane.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#4661

FromJJ <jj4public@vfemail.net>
Date2014-06-30 14:58 +0700
Message-ID<14hfbwhsqk7j9$.183krjxwu969l$.dlg@40tude.net>
In reply to#4656
On Sun, 29 Jun 2014 16:18:53 -0700, Ramine wrote:
> Hello,
> 
> Here it is:
> 
> FreePascal 2.7.1 32-bit
> 
> Mininum running time = 2.00 seconds
> Composite Score MFlops:   468.86
> FFT             Mflops:   236.54    (N=1024)
> SOR             Mflops:   712.89    (100 x 100)
> MonteCarlo:     Mflops:    75.36
> Sparse matmult  Mflops:   441.47    (N=1000, nz=5000)
> LU              Mflops:   878.03    (M=100, N=100)
> 
> And Delphi XE4 32-bit
> 
> Mininum running time = 2.00 seconds
> Composite Score MFlops:   396.12
> FFT             Mflops:   233.56    (N=1024)
> SOR             Mflops:   708.70    (100 x 100)
> MonteCarlo:     Mflops:    75.34
> Sparse matmult  Mflops:   243.81    (N=1000, nz=5000)
> LU              Mflops:   719.16    (M=100, N=100)
> 
> So FreePascal 2.7.1 32-bit is in Composite Score 18% faster
> than Delphi XE4 32-bit on the scimark2 benchmark.
> 
> And FreePascal 2.7.1 64-bit is in Composite Score 23% faster than
> FreePascal 2.7.1 32-bit on then scimark2 benchmark.
> 
> Thank you,
> Amine Moulay Ramdane.

Thank you. This is good news indeed.
Is there a reference regarding benchmark comparison between FPC 2.7.1 and
Delphi XE# RTL? The compiled code, I mean.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#4654

FromRamine <ramine@1.1>
Date2014-06-29 15:14 -0700
Message-ID<lopoin$q9d$5@dont-email.me>
In reply to#4648
Hello,

I have used full optimization on GCC and FreePascal.


Thank you,
Amine Moulay Ramdane.

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | comp.programming

csiph-web