lkml.org 
[lkml]   [1996]   [Mar]   [6]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
SubjectRe: older gcc and pentium
Date
> On Mon, 4 Mar 1996, Mike Castle wrote:
>> Amazingly enough Kai Schulte said:
>>
>>> Really 486? Don't the -m486 alignments bloat the code unnecessarily?
>>
>> Well, if using more memory results in faster memory accesses, is
>> it unnecessary? The alignments result in faster code accesses.
>> But if you have limited core, perhaps the compact code is more
>> appropriate.
>
> It results in more speed for 486-specific accesses, but not for a 386,
> and not necessarily for a 586, either. Can somebody with "real" hardware
> knowledge help out on this? I really don't know enough about the
> architectures, but i'll take a closer look at the new gcc as soon as I
> have the time, promised ;)

Actual test results for non-kernel code indicate that 386 optimized
code runs about 5% faster than 486 optimized code. This may vary
depending on your cache performance.

Recent kernels can use 486+ opcodes, so there is a tradeoff
here that has not been tested. For the very fastest code
(assuming you do not upgrade your compiler) I'd guess that
you should _compile_ for a 386 but set the #define for 486.



\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:36    [W:0.026 / U:0.172 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site