[Vm-dev] Re: [Pharo-project] newDelta >0 failed in sqUnixMemory
andreas.raab at gmx.de
Fri Jan 30 21:25:17 UTC 2009
John M McIntosh wrote:
> With 4.0.1 the compiler optimizations tweaks in the macintosh carbon VM
> build give it a good 10%? better than the defaults optimizations.
> However that presupposes -mtune=prescott -march=pentium-m which one
> can get away with on the macintosh platform, versus the
> bazillion cpu choices & clones on the Wintel side.
I think it would be okay to optimize by default for the more modern CPU
variants. One thing that would be interesting is if you could run
benchmark comparison of your latest Mac production VMs against a Windows
VM running under Parallels or (even better) Bootcamp on the same hardware.
> On 30-Jan-09, at 9:37 AM, Andreas Raab wrote:
>> John M McIntosh wrote:
>>> Yes, I can't recall it was what 50% of the performance of a 3.x
>>> compile out of the box, and after *much*
>>> tweaking of compiler flags it was mmm just 20% slower.. Well
>>> certainly the performance impact was measured in 10 of percent.
>> So what do you use today? gcc 4? And how does it stack up
>> performance-wise against a Windows VM on the same box? I personally
>> wouldn't mind moving forward but the results in the past were so
>> godawful that I haven't tried in a long time.
>> - Andreas
>>> On 30-Jan-09, at 4:33 AM, Michael Rueger wrote:
>>>> John McIntosh and I actually spent some time a few ago compiling VMs on
>>>> Windows and MacOS with the newest GCCs and ran into a bunch of
>>>> especially concerning performance. I had to put the work on the back
>>>> burner for now, but switching to newer compilers will take a bit of
>>>> extra work at some point.
>>> John M. McIntosh <johnmci at smalltalkconsulting.com>
>>> Corporate Smalltalk Consulting Ltd. http://www.smalltalkconsulting.com
> John M. McIntosh <johnmci at smalltalkconsulting.com>
> Corporate Smalltalk Consulting Ltd. http://www.smalltalkconsulting.com
More information about the Vm-dev