Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Comparison QB64 compiled with gcc optimizations and without
#16
66.1x seconds : program compiled with qb64 -Ofast
68.5x seconds : program compiled with original qb64

2 seconds apart. that's not good and surprising. you said in your post in the old forum :

time before adding -O2 to makeline_osx.txt 138.84375 seconds, after adding -O2, 42.6875 seconds, that's 3.25 times faster.

if this is what you said. it means that the -O2 option is more efficient than -Ofast for qb64 because with freebasic it is the opposite.

the tests performed on the sorting algorithms are equally surprising and unexpected.

I don't have time today but I'll have to modify my script to compile qb64 totally with the -O2 option to do this test again.

@Jack. Thank you for posting your code.
Reply


Messages In This Thread
RE: Comparison QB64 compiled with Ofast and without - by Coolman - 05-08-2022, 05:33 PM

Possibly Related Threads…
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  niXman gcc-13.1.0 Jack 8 1,851 10-04-2023, 12:51 PM
Last Post: a740g
  BASIC's Comparison Matrix: ideas for content? CharlieJV 28 6,729 10-03-2022, 01:27 AM
Last Post: CharlieJV
  String comparison oddity...[SOLVED] Pete 6 1,294 08-05-2022, 07:16 PM
Last Post: Pete
  Found a BUG with the QB64 editor compiled with the -O3 option Coolman 2 826 06-02-2022, 06:27 PM
Last Post: Coolman

Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)