# [SOLVED] AMD 8-core vs. Intel 4-core gcc compile time

## Joseph_sys

I have tested two machines compile time, so best candidate would be gcc (as it is bigger application).

AMD 8-core 8MB of RAM  - compile time: 13min. (file system ext4)

Intel 4-core 4MB of RAM  - compile time: 32min. (file system ext3)

Though Gnuash load time is faster on Intel:

Intel load time: 13sec.

AMD load time: 21sec.

Any speculation why AMD with 8-cores is slower in loading GnucashLast edited by Joseph_sys on Wed Dec 28, 2011 1:01 am; edited 1 time in total

----------

## DaggyStyle

 *Joseph_sys wrote:*   

> I have tested two machines compile time, so best candidate would be gcc (as it is bigger application).
> 
> AMD 8-core 8MB of RAM  - compile time: 13min. (file system ext4)
> 
> Intel 4-core 4MB of RAM  - compile time: 32min. (file system ext3)
> ...

 

architecture? clock rate?

AMD better in compilation in your instance because you have more cores, e.g. at any given time you compile 8 files on AMD whereas on Intel you compile 4 files.

----------

## Joseph_sys

 *DaggyStyle wrote:*   

> 
> 
> ...
> 
> architecture? clock rate?
> ...

 

AMD:

model name	: AMD FX(tm)-8150 Eight-Core Processor           

stepping	: 2

cpu MHz		: 3624.371

cache size	: 2048 KB

Intel:

model name	: Intel(R) Core(TM)2 Quad  CPU   Q9550  @ 2.83GHz

stepping	: 7

cpu MHz		: 2830.000

cache size	: 6144 KB

----------

## DaggyStyle

 *Joseph_sys wrote:*   

>  *DaggyStyle wrote:*   
> 
> ...
> 
> architecture? clock rate?
> ...

 

 :Wink: 

----------

## krinn

This is even worster than i first think.

----------

## depontius

All this, and no discussion of the disk subsystems, filesystems, etc - when we're asking about application load time?

----------

## Veldrin

I knew, that Bulldozer/Llano has trouble competing with core i7/i5 - but that it even has trouble with an old core2 worries me. 

From what I've read, it looks less grim in the HPC area.

----------

## depontius

I find it fascinating/annoying that Bulldozer has essentially been declared DOA.  There are some rather new assumptions implicit in the architecture that will require some compiler and scheduler accommodation in order to get optimal performance, and very little has been done so far.

A few years back, Intel introduced two beasts called NetBurst and IA-64, both of which were horrid pigs at the start.  (Some would say that they're still horrid pigs, in fact.)  But years of compiler work managed to get decent performance out of NetBurst, though for IA-64 it took both years of compiler work and successive hardware revisions, including making the architecture look a little more traditional and less EPIC.

----------

## DaggyStyle

 *depontius wrote:*   

> I find it fascinating/annoying that Bulldozer has essentially been declared DOA.  There are some rather new assumptions implicit in the architecture that will require some compiler and scheduler accommodation in order to get optimal performance, and very little has been done so far.
> 
> A few years back, Intel introduced two beasts called NetBurst and IA-64, both of which were horrid pigs at the start.  (Some would say that they're still horrid pigs, in fact.)  But years of compiler work managed to get decent performance out of NetBurst, though for IA-64 it took both years of compiler work and successive hardware revisions, including making the architecture look a little more traditional and less EPIC.

 

I second to that.

in addition, Intel is using a clever PR stunt against AMD which they cannot counter back so it is logical that people will think it is a crappy cpu.

the BD arch has a rather crazy design and it will take time to get the max out of it.

----------

## krinn

 *DaggyStyle wrote:*   

> 
> 
> in addition, Intel is using a clever PR stunt against AMD which they cannot counter back so it is logical that people will think it is a crappy cpu.

 

The fact it might not be a crappy arch, won't remove the fact it's a crappy cpu.

There's no PR there, just numbers

Common, 13 minutes to build a gcc with a 3.6ghz cpu and 8 cores

     Thu Sep  8 00:09:18 2011 >>> sys-devel/gcc-4.4.2

       merge time: 9 minutes and 52 seconds.

     Wed Sep 28 05:32:09 2011 >>> sys-devel/gcc-4.4.3-r3

       merge time: 9 minutes and 38 seconds.

     Sat Nov 26 04:07:56 2011 >>> sys-devel/gcc-4.4.3-r3

       merge time: 9 minutes and 48 seconds.

     Sat Nov 26 16:25:37 2011 >>> sys-devel/gcc-4.4.3-r3

       merge time: 9 minutes and 19 seconds.

     Tue Dec  6 07:22:50 2011 >>> sys-devel/gcc-4.4.3-r3

       merge time: 9 minutes and 28 seconds.

This is my (now old) model name	: Intel(R) Core(TM) i7 CPU         950  @ 3.07GHz

And this is a 4 core cpu, 8 cores too if you agree with the lame AMD PR way to count cores  :Smile: 

----------

## depontius

Run your Core-I7 on gcc-3.4.6 and tell me that it isn't a crappy CPU.

----------

## DaggyStyle

 *krinn wrote:*   

>  *DaggyStyle wrote:*   
> 
> in addition, Intel is using a clever PR stunt against AMD which they cannot counter back so it is logical that people will think it is a crappy cpu. 
> 
> The fact it might not be a crappy arch, won't remove the fact it's a crappy cpu.
> ...

 

```
dagg@NCC-5001-D ~ $ sudo genlop -ei gcc

 * sys-devel/gcc

     Sun Oct  2 23:54:16 2011 >>> sys-devel/gcc-4.6.1-r1

     Mon Oct  3 03:35:46 2011 >>> sys-devel/gcc-4.5.3-r1

     Mon Oct 31 19:09:08 2011 >>> sys-devel/gcc-4.6.2

     Tue Nov 15 19:44:29 2011 >>> sys-devel/gcc-4.6.2

     Tue Nov 15 20:01:47 2011 >>> sys-devel/gcc-4.5.3-r1

     Tue Dec  6 18:15:12 2011 >>> sys-devel/gcc-4.6.2

     Tue Dec  6 18:39:04 2011 >>> sys-devel/gcc-4.5.3-r1

     Wed Dec 14 21:40:29 2011 >>> sys-devel/gcc-4.5.3-r2

   Total builds: 8

   Global build time: 3 hours, 16 minutes and 25 seconds.

   Average merge time: 24 minutes and 33 seconds.

   Info about currently installed ebuild:

   * sys-devel/gcc-4.5.3-r2

   Install date: Wed Dec 14 21:40:29 2011

   USE=""

   CFLAGS="-march=native -O2 -pipe"

   * sys-devel/gcc-4.6.2

   Install date: Tue Dec  6 18:15:12 2011

   USE=""

   CFLAGS="-march=native -O2 -pipe"

dagg@NCC-5001-D ~ $ uname -a

Linux NCC-5001-D 3.1.5-gentoo #1 SMP PREEMPT Sun Dec 11 19:51:34 IST 2011 x86_64 Intel(R) Core(TM) i7-2600 CPU @ 3.40GHz GenuineIntel GNU/Linux

```

so according to your logic my cpu is crap too. with 8 cores...

that is not a valid benchmark.

----------

## Anon-E-moose

People...buy whatever suits you. Price and/or performance should decide.

----------

## Joseph_sys

SOLVED

The problem is open source RADEON driver.

I loaded close source ati driver and "gnucash" loads in 6sec.

Though, it crashes on mp4 files

----------

## asturm

The AMD is not an 8-core in the same sense as the Intel is a 4-core.

----------

