Sign in to follow this  

Visual Studio 2003 vs Visual Studio 2005 = benchmark

This topic is 4356 days old which is more than the 365 day threshold we allow for new replies. Please post a new topic.

If you intended to correct an error in the post then please contact us.

Recommended Posts

I get Visual Studio 2005 yesterday and my first test the new compiler using a raytracer I have done last year and available here: http://prdownloads.sourceforge.net/glf/raytrace-b1.0.zip?download and work with GCC 3.3.3, VC2003 and VC2005. My programs are compile in release mode. They use the same scene. The result is the time to generate a 320*240 image. My result: - 10.32s with my VC2003 raytracer - 12.59s with my VC2005 raytracer using the setting "/fp:fast" - 20.70s with my VC2005 raytracer using the setting "/fp:precise" The default value of "/fp" is precise. This result have been obtain with a 1.5GHz Dothan and I have done other tests with an Ahtlon XP 2800+ that give me the same kind of result. Have you test VC2005 compiler preformences?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I haven't benchmarked, but the 150k file size bloat in my final dll for my bot using 2005 was enough to keep me compiling my bot releases with 2003. I'm hoping it's due to some other compiler flag that is enabled by default when converting 2003 projects that I just haven't found yet.

Anyone know anything about this?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote:
Original post by GrooveHave you test VC2005 compiler preformences?

Yes, I tested it with my raytracer and saw virtually no difference in speed between VC2003 and VC2005. Do you have SSE code generation enabled? There may be differences in the way that is implemented that would explain what you are seeing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote:
Original post by Daggett
Are you using the lib or dll runtime mode? The lib mode can add megs to your exe size. But you don't have to include the runtime dlls.


dll. My 2005 compiled dll is ~200k larger than the 2003 one. Pretty significant considering the 2003 dll is 1,104Kb. 18% size increase just by switching compiler. wth?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote:
Original post by sjelkjd
Quote:
Original post by GrooveHave you test VC2005 compiler preformences?

Yes, I tested it with my raytracer and saw virtually no difference in speed between VC2003 and VC2005. Do you have SSE code generation enabled? There may be differences in the way that is implemented that would explain what you are seeing.


I have tried both with and without SSE instructions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I had the same size bloat like you after converting a project. It took some time until I recognized, that RTTI (runtime type information) was enabled. After disabling it, my binaries had the original size like compiling it in VC++ 2003. RTTI can be disabled under "Configuration properties -> Language -> Enable runtime info" or use the "/GR-" compiler flag.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just glancing at the options:

* Optimize for size
* Enable string pooling
* Disable the buffer security check
* Disable Manifest generation and embedding

None of which are probably enough to account for 180kB.

(and people were complaining about GCC producing large EXEs... well, it's not alone. [grin])

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
VC++ 2005 is not particularly better at optimizing code than 2003. Except for areas where better standards compliance allows better written code, the only real significant new thing is profile guided optimization.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This topic is 4356 days old which is more than the 365 day threshold we allow for new replies. Please post a new topic.

If you intended to correct an error in the post then please contact us.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

Sign in to follow this