Public Benchmarks?

I just noticed that the LLVM page in Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LLVM ) contains the statement

For run-time performance of the compiled programs, GCC formerly outperformed LLVM by 10% on average.[18][19] Newer results indicate that LLVM has now caught up with GCC in this area, and is now compiling binaries of approximately equal performance, except for programs using OpenMP.[20]

I believe that is wrong (their evidential link is from 2012!), and our OpenMP performance is now at least comparable with, if not better than, that of GCC, but I don’t have any public benchmarks to prove it.

So, does anyone have any pointers to public articles that show that, so that we can go in and fix the Wikipedia article?

(Phoronix’ latest at http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=gcc-61-clang39&num=1 doesn’t seem to have any OpenMP codes in it, so that’s no use).

Thanks

– Jim

James Cownie james.h.cownie@intel.com
SSG/DPD/TCAR (Technical Computing, Analyzers and Runtimes)

Tel: +44 117 9071438

There was in article one year ago: http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=clang-svn-openmp&num=2

I never came around to confirm the test results and it may look different for 3.9 now…

Regards,

Jonas

There was in article one year ago: http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=clang-svn-openmp&num=2

I never came around to confirm the test results and it may look different for 3.9 now…

Regards,

Jonas

There are a bit fresher results for clang 3.8 (though no comparison with gcc): http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=llvm-clang-363738&num=3

Yours,
Andrey

So that’s somehow expected: The default value for –fopenmp got flipped to libomp in 3.8, you needed –fopenmp=libomp for 3.7 which isn’t used in this article.

Cheers,

Jonas