From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Kurt Fitzner Subject: [parisc-linux] B132L outperforms C160 - 64-bit userland needed? Date: Tue, 16 Aug 2005 03:23:28 -0600 Message-ID: <4301B090.9040405@excelcia.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 To: parisc-linux@lists.parisc-linux.org Return-Path: List-Id: parisc-linux developers list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: parisc-linux-bounces@lists.parisc-linux.org In the interim until I can source an ISA/EISA fast ethernet card, I've been playing with my new C160. I decided to benchmark it and compare it to my B132L. To my surprise, when it came to integer operations, the B132L outperforms the C160! I benchmarked using nbench, which is a Linux/Unix port of Byte magazine's ByteMark. Full results from both machines are at the end of this post. Both machines were benchmarked using identical binaries compiled with: -O3 -march=1.1 -mschedule=7300 -mfast-indirect-calls -mgas Thinking that the scheduling and architecture might be slowing down the C160, I recompiled it with: -O3 -march=2.0 -mschedule=8000 -mfast-indirect-calls -mgas When that produced even worse results, I tried -march=2.0 vs 1.1 and -mschedule=8000 vs 7300 seperately. Each one alone slows down the benchmark and the effect is addititive. It seems that in Linux, right now at least, compiling with -march=2.0 or -mschedule=8000 is a Bad Thing. If you look at the individual results, in most areas the C160 performs about 20% better than the B132. It's just that in a few areas, the C160 has absolutely dismal performance. Numeric sorting and the assignment algorithm were both notably slower on the C160. With a clock speed 20% faster, I must admit that the C160's poor showing was a dissappointment. I'm wondering if this is because there isn't a 64-bit userland yet. Is stepping down to 32-bit on the C160 hurting its performance that badly? I suppose (assuming I'm correct about the reason for the performance drop) my options are to wait for 64-bit userland or to put HPUX on it. Is there any way which someone can help the 64-bit userland effort who is quite strong in system-level programming in general though weak in Linux kernel programming specifically? Is there a project web site for this effort? Kurt Phong (C160): ------------------------------------------------------------------ TEST : Iterations/sec. : Old Index : New Index : : Pentium 90* : AMD K6/233* --------------------:------------------:-------------:------------ NUMERIC SORT : 37.51 : 0.96 : 0.32 STRING SORT : 5.0486 : 2.26 : 0.35 BITFIELD : 1.6052e+07 : 2.75 : 0.58 FP EMULATION : 8.4215 : 4.04 : 0.93 FOURIER : 1102.1 : 1.25 : 0.70 ASSIGNMENT : 0.59547 : 2.27 : 0.59 IDEA : 115.34 : 1.76 : 0.52 HUFFMAN : 89.382 : 2.48 : 0.79 NEURAL NET : 1.6905 : 2.72 : 1.14 LU DECOMPOSITION : 41.254 : 2.14 : 1.54 =======================ORIGINAL BYTEMARK RESULTS======================= INTEGER INDEX : 2.187 FLOATING-POINT INDEX: 1.938 Baseline: MSDOS P90, 256 KB L2-cache, Watcom* compiler 10.0 ===========================LINUX DATA BELOW============================ CPU : Raven U 160 (9000/780/C160) 160MHz L2 Cache : 512 KB (WB, 0-way associative) OS : Linux 2.6.10-pa11-phong-3 C compiler : gcc version 3.3.5 (Debian 1:3.3.5-13) libc : ld-2.3.2.so MEMORY INDEX : 0.491 INTEGER INDEX : 0.591 FLOATING-POINT INDEX: 1.075 Baseline: Linux AMD K6/233*, 512 KB L2-cache, gcc 2.7.2.3, libc-5.4.38 ======================================================================= Megabyte (B132L): ------------------------------------------------------------------ TEST : Iterations/sec. : Old Index : New Index : : Pentium 90* : AMD K6/233* --------------------:------------------:-------------:------------ NUMERIC SORT : 60.695 : 1.56 : 0.51 STRING SORT : 3.3905 : 1.51 : 0.23 BITFIELD : 1.1081e+07 : 1.90 : 0.40 FP EMULATION : 6.0832 : 2.92 : 0.67 FOURIER : 876.58 : 1.00 : 0.56 ASSIGNMENT : 0.80283 : 3.05 : 0.79 IDEA : 150.04 : 2.29 : 0.68 HUFFMAN : 76.017 : 2.11 : 0.67 NEURAL NET : 1.1334 : 1.82 : 0.77 LU DECOMPOSITION : 41.733 : 2.16 : 1.56 =======================ORIGINAL BYTEMARK RESULTS======================= INTEGER INDEX : 2.121 FLOATING-POINT INDEX: 1.577 Baseline: MSDOS P90, 256 KB L2-cache, Watcom* compiler 10.0 ===========================LINUX DATA BELOW============================ CPU : Merlin L2 132 (9000/778/B132L) 132MHz Cache : 64 KB (WB, 0-way associative) OS : Linux 2.6.8.1-pa11-megabyte-20050720 C compiler : gcc version 3.3.5 (Debian 1:3.3.5-13) libc : ld-2.3.2.so MEMORY INDEX : 0.419 INTEGER INDEX : 0.630 FLOATING-POINT INDEX: 0.875 Baseline: Linux AMD K6/233*, 512 KB L2-cache, gcc 2.7.2.3, libc-5.4.38 ======================================================================= _______________________________________________ parisc-linux mailing list parisc-linux@lists.parisc-linux.org http://lists.parisc-linux.org/mailman/listinfo/parisc-linux