Yahoolian wrote:I'm pretty sure the nature of compiling, lots of usually unpredictable jumps, would mean that amd chips generally perform better.
From a theoretical standpoint, his viewpoint is completely valid. Compilers (and especially optimizing compilers) use algorithms that tend to emphasize branches over loops. In the simplest case, a compiler has a single loop over the program input, with the body of the loop containing several switch statements. When optimizations come into play (common expression elimination, hoisting, loop unrolling, etc) you have more switches. Often a lot more. A compiler thus tends towards the "more jumps/branches than loops" end of the spectrum, whereas a signal processing application like an MP3 encoder tends towards the other end. The P4, with its long pipeline and high memory bandwidth, is optimized for loops not branches (everytime it mispredicts a branch you have a potential stall and pipeline flush). This is why it does so well on encoding tasks, and why you would expect it to not do as well in compilation.Captain Ned wrote:Yahoolian wrote:I'm pretty sure the nature of compiling, lots of usually unpredictable jumps, would mean that amd chips generally perform better.
Benchies to prove/disprove? I admit I have no idea if your viewpoint is valid, but a pseudo-blanket statement such as yours begs for some empirical data, n'est-ce pas?
wagsbags wrote:Intel or AMD? Which generally compiles programs faster in these two languages?
danny e. wrote: and as for the question.. i dont knwo
Yahoolian wrote:i cant seem to spell correctly either
Or find the edit button.
wagsbags wrote:Actually I was just asking for my roommate because his parents are Computer Scientists and ironically they always buy dells, no building their own computers, no upgrading, they just buy a new Dell every year or so. Visual C++ is what one of them uses.
Very true. Computer scientists aren't necessarily computer hardware people, or even competent software users. I had a c++ professor that would write up his examples in html. One time the fonts were too small, and rather than changing the font size in his browser, he sshed into the server and edited the source. The only guarantee you have about computer science people is that they can likely code some.Porky wrote:Just because they are computer scientists, doesn't mean they know anything about computers (just know how to make programs). Kinda...sad...but true in many cases.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests