Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2000 19:06:28 +0200
From: Marc Lehmann <pcg AT goof DOT com>
To: pgcc AT delorie DOT com
Subject: Re: pgcc didn't perform for me
Message-ID: <20000928190628.G18291@cerebro.laendle>
Mail-Followup-To: pgcc AT delorie DOT com
References: <Pine DOT GSO DOT 4 DOT 21 DOT 0009212159160 DOT 24859-100000 AT physun DOT physics DOT mcmaster DOT ca>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <Pine.GSO.4.21.0009212159160.24859-100000@physun.physics.mcmaster.ca>; from wadsley@physun.physics.mcmaster.ca on Thu, Sep 21, 2000 at 10:18:24PM -0400
X-Operating-System: Linux version 2.2.17 (root AT cerebro) (gcc version pgcc-2.95.2 19991024 (release)) 
X-Copyright: copyright 2000 Marc Alexander Lehmann - all rights reserved
Reply-To: pgcc AT delorie DOT com
Errors-To: nobody AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List: pgcc AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To: listserv AT delorie DOT com
Precedence: bulk

On Thu, Sep 21, 2000 at 10:18:24PM -0400, James Wadsley <wadsley AT physun DOT physics DOT mcmaster DOT ca> wrote:
> I have a high performance tree-code for astrophysical problems and I was
> running on an AMD-K7 900 MHz.

Well, that's not a pentium.

> After my tests I'm not going to simply take your word for
> it that there is an advantage to pgcc.

I never gave my word for the amd-k7, esp. since I have no way to test it
since I do not own such a chip ;)

> Sorry,

No problem. pgcc performs best with pentii, and since a lot of
optimizations fortunately went into 2.95.2 pgcc becomes increasingly
obsolete ;)

-- 
      -----==-                                             |
      ----==-- _                                           |
      ---==---(_)__  __ ____  __       Marc Lehmann      +--
      --==---/ / _ \/ // /\ \/ /       pcg AT opengroup DOT org |e|
      -=====/_/_//_/\_,_/ /_/\_\       XX11-RIPE         --+
    The choice of a GNU generation                       |
                                                         |