| |||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
Acer's Linpus Linux Lite (Fedora) ultra portable laptop piles the pressure on Microsoft (FSM)Acer's Linpus Linux Lite (Fedora) ultra portable laptop piles the pressure on Microsoft (FSM)Posted Jul 5, 2008 7:30 UTC (Sat) by rvfh (subscriber, #31018)In reply to: Acer's Linpus Linux Lite (Fedora) ultra portable laptop piles the pressure on Microsoft (FSM) by Duncan Parent article: Acer's Linpus Linux Lite (Fedora) ultra portable laptop piles the pressure on Microsoft (FSM)
If you plan to recompile everything, I strongly recommend you use the Intel compiler with the right options, it might bring you up to 30% performance improvement according to Intel... The atom has got a 16-stage pipeline which is apparently unusual (I am no expert)... HTH
(Log in to post comments)
Acer's Linpus Linux Lite (Fedora) ultra portable laptop piles the pressure on Microsoft (FSM) Posted Jul 5, 2008 13:46 UTC (Sat) by jamesh (subscriber, #1159) [Link] Is that 30% compared to GCC targeting normal x86 chips or GCC targeting LPIA (Low Power Intel Architecture)? There are enough differences that it makes sense to optimise differently for Atom.
Acer's Linpus Linux Lite (Fedora) ultra portable laptop piles the pressure on Microsoft (FSM) Posted Jul 5, 2008 17:13 UTC (Sat) by rvfh (subscriber, #31018) [Link] It's probably with the worst possible options of GCC, as I found it in the mouth of some of my (non-free software loving) colleagues and on the Intel site ;) More seriously, I can believe that ICC will have optimizations before GCC for this processor, and would bet you can get this kind of improvement figures with some particular uses (multimedia ?). Not sure there'll be much difference on a web/file server though, as memory and disk access will make the bulk of the response time.
Acer's Linpus Linux Lite (Fedora) ultra portable laptop piles the pressure on Microsoft (FSM) Posted Jul 22, 2008 13:14 UTC (Tue) by Duncan (guest, #6647) [Link] The Intel compiler (ICC) is closed source. It's really quite simple. If they don't respect my rights (as expressed in the FSF's four freedoms), I don't trust them; if I don't trust them, their code doesn't go on my box. (Yes, it's their hardware, but that's different, and at least it's a relatively open spec.) So even if gcc was an order of magnitude slower, I'd still be using either it or some other open compiler. Of course, there'd be little point in my purchasing the hardware in that case, then. Even for those who will use ICC, however, at least according to a recent thread on the topic on the Gentoo-dev list, it won't compile everything, and there's additional complexity when using a mixed-compiled environment due to imperfect "impedance matching". The sig I use on the lists is relevant here: -- Duncan "Every nonfree program has a lord, a master -- and if you use the program, he is your master." Richard Stallman
|
|
||||||||||||