---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: James Huk <huk256@xxxxxxxxx> Date: Fri, Feb 12, 2010 at 4:26 AM Subject: Re: Wine 3D performance - where does the bottleneck lies and how To: David Gerard <dgerard@xxxxxxxxx> On Tue, Feb 9, 2010 at 1:28 AM, David Gerard <dgerard@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 9 February 2010 00:12, James Huk <huk256@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> Thanks for the information everyone - that cleared thing up a bit. One >> more thing I was wondering... do you know if somebody ever tried >> compiling wine using Intel C Compiler (presumably - the fastest x86 >> compiler there is)? Should it be possible to compile wine using this >> compiler "out of the box" or would some changes to the code need to be >> done first? > > > http://wiki.winehq.org/icc - some experiments along these lines. Not > sure anyone's actively working to keep Wine compilable in icc, let > alone doing performance testing. Basically, give it a try and you'll > be helping keep the Wine codebase robust and cross-compiler compliant! > > > - d. > Ok, i managed to compile it, well most of it anyway - some test failed, or at least I think that's what is in the log. Also dxgi (whatever that is) failed to compile, and no programs were build, I had to go to the programs dir and type "make" there - then they compiled without problem. Hopefully nothing else is missing. And holy hell! Wine source after compilation has 17.7 GB!! With GCC it usually have a bit more then 1GB - 16GB difference is a bit weird. As for speed - I will try to test that tomorrow (sorry, it is 4.23 AM in here ;] ), but I already managed to run Operation Flashpoint and I must say, I don't see any difference in speed, however more apps need to be tested. I will try some 3d marks tomorrow, anything else you would recommend for speed tests? Compilation log can be found here: http://wine.x.pl/wine-1.1.38-ICC-compilation.log.tar.gz
