From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Delivered-To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr Received: from concorde.inria.fr (concorde.inria.fr [192.93.2.39]) by yquem.inria.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 00FA7BC84 for ; Wed, 30 Mar 2005 10:43:38 +0200 (CEST) Received: from pauillac.inria.fr (pauillac.inria.fr [128.93.11.35]) by concorde.inria.fr (8.13.0/8.13.0) with ESMTP id j2U7k8th003362 for ; Wed, 30 Mar 2005 09:46:08 +0200 Received: from concorde.inria.fr (concorde.inria.fr [192.93.2.39]) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) with ESMTP id JAA21999 for ; Wed, 30 Mar 2005 09:46:08 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from alex.barettalocal.com (h213-255-109-130.albacom.net [213.255.109.130] (may be forged)) by concorde.inria.fr (8.13.0/8.13.0) with ESMTP id j2U7k7jt003354 for ; Wed, 30 Mar 2005 09:46:07 +0200 Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by alex.barettalocal.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 05F6D2BAA3C; Wed, 30 Mar 2005 09:46:05 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <424A593A.5050608@barettadeit.com> Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2005 09:46:02 +0200 From: Alex Baretta User-Agent: Debian Thunderbird 1.0 (X11/20050116) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Jon Harrop Cc: Ocaml Subject: Re: [Caml-list] 32- and 64-bit performance References: <200503300340.15874.jon@ffconsultancy.com> In-Reply-To: <200503300340.15874.jon@ffconsultancy.com> X-Enigmail-Version: 0.90.0.0 X-Enigmail-Supports: pgp-inline, pgp-mime Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Miltered: at concorde with ID 424A5940.002 by Joe's j-chkmail (http://j-chkmail.ensmp.fr)! X-Miltered: at concorde with ID 424A593F.000 by Joe's j-chkmail (http://j-chkmail.ensmp.fr)! X-Spam: no; 0.00; baretta:01 caml-list:01 timings:01 ocamlopt:01 ocamlopt:01 baretta:01 ...:98 wrote:01 slower:01 debian:02 benchmark:02 alex:03 alex:03 generally:03 370:96 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.0.2 (2004-11-16) on yquem.inria.fr X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.1 required=5.0 tests=FORGED_RCVD_HELO autolearn=disabled version=3.0.2 X-Spam-Level: Jon Harrop wrote: > I just bought a new Athlon 64 laptop and installed 32- and 64-bit Debian. > Here are some timings, showing the performance change when moving from 32- > to 64-bit using ocamlopt (3.08.2) and g++ (3.4.4): ... > > So ocamlopt does seem to generate significantly better code in these examples, > particularly when they are floating point intensive. Also, only one test is > slower in 64-bit, due to its heavy use of trees. > Why do you suppose is there *any* benchmark faster in 32 bit mode than in 64 bit mode on the Athlon64? Since the AMD64 architecture is generally better than IA32--were it only for the additional registers--I would expect all benchmarks to run as fast or faster when compiled to the AMD64 instruction set. Alex -- ********************************************************************* http://www.barettadeit.com/ Baretta DE&IT A division of Baretta SRL tel. +39 02 370 111 55 fax. +39 02 370 111 54 Our technology: The Application System/Xcaml (AS/Xcaml) The FreerP Project