Home     |     .Net Programming    |     cSharp Home    |     Sql Server Home    |     Javascript / Client Side Development     |     Ajax Programming

Ruby on Rails Development     |     Perl Programming     |     C Programming Language     |     C++ Programming     |     IT Jobs

Python Programming Language     |     Laptop Suggestions?    |     TCL Scripting     |     Fortran Programming     |     Scheme Programming Language


 
 
Cervo Technologies
The Right Source to Outsource

MS Dynamics CRM 3.0

Fortran Programming Language

IVF vs CVF on P4; EXE Speed ?


Hi,

Just curious as to other's results.

We have two large optical analysis codes which crunch numbers and do
I/O which test about 30-40% faster when compiled in IVF rather than
CVF. One uses Winteracter and one just calls the Windows APIs
directly.

We have a small number crunching test code which shows the two codes
generate EXEs of about the same speed.

We are building stand alone .EXEs without the .NET thing.

I'd love to get other's results when switching or thinking about
switching from CVF to IVF.

IVF and CVF both seem to be very good compilers and they both work
well with Lawson Wakefields super great Winteracter code which I use
for GUI and graphics.

Most sincerely,

Jim Klein
James E. Klein
jamesekl@earthlink.net

Engineering Calculations
http://www.ecalculations.com
ecalculati@ecalculations.com
Engineering Calculations is the home of
the KDP-2 Optical Design Program
for Windows.
1-818-507-5706 (Voice and Fax)
1-818-823-4121

"KDP2, not quite easy enough for a Caveman to use" :-)

On Fri, 25 May 2007 19:28:13 GMT, Jim Klein <jamesekl@earthlink.net>
 wrote in <2mde5398ekt7e6ou626acdp9cgeab63@4ax.com>:

> We have two large optical analysis codes which crunch numbers and do
> I/O which test about 30-40% faster when compiled in IVF rather than
> CVF.

        This might just be a case of the later compiler knowing about more
recent CPU technology than the older one.  e.g. I was upgrading my seti@home
clients this week and discovered that my Pentium D machine does have the SSE3
instructions despite the fact that the Linux 2.4 kernel it runs does not
record this in /proc/cpuinfo -- i.e. the older software is ignorant of
the newer technology.  I think...  I'm still waiting for enough results to
accumulate to see if the SSE3 app does actually run faster; on individual
workunits it does seem to be true.

--
Ivan Reid, School of Engineering & Design, _____________  CMS Collaboration,
Brunel University.    Ivan.Reid@[brunel.ac.uk|cern.ch]    Room 40-1-B12, CERN
        KotPT -- "for stupidity above and beyond the call of duty".

CVF does not need Microsoft C++ NET (nor any other prior software) as
does Intel as a condition to work. This is a consideration.

Terence wrote:
> CVF does not need Microsoft C++ NET (nor any other prior software) as
> does Intel as a condition to work. This is a consideration.

??  You can drive IVF from the command line.
Add to del.icio.us | Digg this | Stumble it | Powered by Megasolutions Inc