By: none (none.delete@this.none.com), July 11, 2013 4:12 am
Room: Moderated Discussions
Wilco (Wilco.Dijkstra.delete@this.ntlworld.com) on July 11, 2013 5:03 am wrote:
[...]
> Which benchmark is affected by denormals? I thought pretty much any modern
> CPU nowadays deals with denormals in hardware with minimal penalty...
That's an Intel claim, so I can't say. I have no reason not to believe it.
[...]
> Yes, GCC can still generate some inefficient code at times, especially the array accesses look
> bad... The Intel version is vectorized, which means the ARM version will be about twice as
> fast again when built with Neon. So yes, setting compiler options etc right matters...
The x86 loop I showed is scalar. There's a vectored one in Geekbench, for x86 only, but I'm not sure it's ever run (and if it is, then Saltwell stinks even more than what Geekbench shows).
[...]
> Which benchmark is affected by denormals? I thought pretty much any modern
> CPU nowadays deals with denormals in hardware with minimal penalty...
That's an Intel claim, so I can't say. I have no reason not to believe it.
[...]
> Yes, GCC can still generate some inefficient code at times, especially the array accesses look
> bad... The Intel version is vectorized, which means the ARM version will be about twice as
> fast again when built with Neon. So yes, setting compiler options etc right matters...
The x86 loop I showed is scalar. There's a vectored one in Geekbench, for x86 only, but I'm not sure it's ever run (and if it is, then Saltwell stinks even more than what Geekbench shows).
