[News] AMD Ryzen-optimized C and C++ Compilers Improve Performance

[StyM]

https://www.techpowerup.com/233548/a...ve-performance

AMD followed up its Ryzen processor launch with support for the software development ecosystem by releasing special C and C++ compilers that let you make software that can fully take advantage of the "Zen" micro-architecture. The new AOCC 1.0 C/C++ compilers by AMD are based on LLVM Clang, with "Zen" specific patches. AMD claims AOCC offers improved vectorization and better code generation for "Zen" based CPUs. It also includes a "Zen" optimized linker.

Phoronix benchmarked AOCC against other more common compilers such as GCC 6.3, GCC 7.1, GCC 8, LLVM Clang 4.0, and LLVM Clang 5.0 using a Ryzen 7-1700 eight-core processor powered machine, running on Ubuntu 17.04 Linux, and found that AOCC offers higher performance than GCC in most cases, LLVM Clang in some cases, and marginally higher performance than LLVM Clang in some cases. Find more results in the link below.

[AliG]

Wait.

I was about to be impressed, until I saw it was based off LLVM CLang. Performance increase appears to be negligible?

[drmrlordx]

I'm surprised LLVM Clang performs better than GCC, period.

[NEOAethyr]

Here's the real articles:

http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?pag...zen-aocc&num=1
http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?pag...izations&num=1

There's nothing to really see, it's like a said before, using opts doesn't usually net that much perf, though it's usually worth it, any little bit helps.
It looks like whatever amd is trying to do though isn't helping and is just increasing compile time.

Besides, I don't use clang...
I use gcc or ms's compiler...
When you use a 3rd party compiler you have to ensure there's a project file, a working build path, etc.
It just doesn't usually work out of the box.
So I don't know what they're trying todo, who's gonna redo there code to compile with a compiler that has a short lifetime expectancy... ^^
I get they're trying to get patches to clang I guess, upstreamed, in that sense ok, sure, but who actually uses clang?
I know it's supposed to be better when it does work, and etc, but I just want my code to compile lol, ie gcc...
Or maybe that was codebox or whatever it was called, or codeblocks, I don't remember, shows you how much I care about 3rd party compilers...

[drmrlordx]

I had always thought Clang produced superior compile times but binaries with inferior performance/optimization. Been too long since I checked, I guess.

And not having ICC in the mix = teh fail