Performance comparison, ULE vs 4BSD and AMD64 vs i386

[John Baldwin]

On Tuesday 24 February 2004 05:04 pm, Jem Matzan wrote:
> Brooks Davis wrote:
> >On Tue, Feb 24, 2004 at 04:37:44PM -0500, Jem Matzan wrote:
> >>How about AMD64 being slower than i386 on the same hardware? By
> >>slower, I mean a buildworld -j4 took about 400 seconds longer in AMD64
> >>mode.
> >
> >You can't usefully compare compile times when you are compiling for
> >a different instructions set.  The work involved is rairly the same
> >so the results are meaning less.  If you could factor out the cost of
> >building the native bootstrap tools since that isn't the same job on
> >each machine, the speed of a cross buildworld would be an intresting
> >test.  For comparing i386 and amd64, I'd probably build an alpha or
> >sparc64 world so the target would be entierly different.
> >
> >-- Brooks
>
> I figured that the world would be the same for both AMD64 and i386. That
> really sucks that all of this data and all of that time has been more or
> less wasted on doing buildworld time benchmarks. As far as I know it
> isn't possible to do a crossbuild (I've tried before, and I read on the
> list several weeks ago that it won't work). Do you have any suggestions
> for measuring compile times?

You can do a crossbuild easy, just do:

make TARGET_ARCH=amd64 buildworld

or subsitute whatever arch for amd64.

-- 
John Baldwin <jhb at FreeBSD.org>  <><  http://www.FreeBSD.org/~jhb/
"Power Users Use the Power to Serve"  =  http://www.FreeBSD.org