f the freely available full version of the Windows SDK is installed, 64-bit applications can be built on the command line using the x64 cross-compiler (Cl.exe) supplied with the SDK.
I don't know if this is a totally separate thing or somehow part of visual C++ express.
I don't care if this is command line or IDE, my only concern is the performance of the binaries. Does anyone have experience with these tools who can comment on that?
The price for the Intel compiler is pretty steep for me and thus I am looking for an alternative that will not sacrifice too much performance. The Linux mingw64 cross compiler I use seems to give up a LOT of performance. The Linux gcc version of the same source code on the same computer is significantly faster.
Do you use intel compiler on linux? That's free...
I am happy with gcc on Linux as it produces fast binaries. The problem I have is how to produce fast binaries for the Windows users of Komodo.
f the freely available full version of the Windows SDK is installed, 64-bit applications can be built on the command line using the x64 cross-compiler (Cl.exe) supplied with the SDK.
I don't know if this is a totally separate thing or somehow part of visual C++ express.
I don't care if this is command line or IDE, my only concern is the performance of the binaries. Does anyone have experience with these tools who can comment on that?
The price for the Intel compiler is pretty steep for me and thus I am looking for an alternative that will not sacrifice too much performance. The Linux mingw64 cross compiler I use seems to give up a LOT of performance. The Linux gcc version of the same source code on the same computer is significantly faster.
Don, I have a VM with Windows 7 and am using mingw64 native (http://sourceforge.net/projects/mingw-w64/) to make my builds - instead of using the cross-compiler on Linux. The builds created with this native toolchain and using PGO are as fast as the ones compiled with MSVC. Don't ask me why though...
f the freely available full version of the Windows SDK is installed, 64-bit applications can be built on the command line using the x64 cross-compiler (Cl.exe) supplied with the SDK.
I don't know if this is a totally separate thing or somehow part of visual C++ express.
I don't care if this is command line or IDE, my only concern is the performance of the binaries. Does anyone have experience with these tools who can comment on that?
The price for the Intel compiler is pretty steep for me and thus I am looking for an alternative that will not sacrifice too much performance. The Linux mingw64 cross compiler I use seems to give up a LOT of performance. The Linux gcc version of the same source code on the same computer is significantly faster.
I am not sure if it is still true, but the Express version of the compiler used to lack some of the enhanced optimization features like PGO.
Don wrote:
It never occurred to me to try that. I will give it a try.
Don
You should. Whenever is possible I try to use free & open source software (and at the same time keep away from MS products ).
This is a good part of the reason I user Linux, the other part being that it is a far superior platform anyway.
I don't mind paying for things that are worth the money - but it really irks me to spend money on a product that produces inferior compiles for the AMD platform. It seems like anything these big corporations are involved in comes with strings attached and nasty tricks. If I bought this I would probably then have to buy something else to make it work the way I want.
With the MS OS itself, the string attached is that you are not really buying the OS, you are purchasing the "right" to use it and only then under a bunch of restrictions. Another string is that whenever I purchase a computer I am almost always purchasing one of these licences, even though I don't want it and the first thing I do is format the hard drive. That is why I build my own machines now even though I don't really like to mess with hardware.
Yes, I know you can purchase computers with Linux installed, but it's not always the one you want - you have to go to extra trouble often to get the price of windows taken off the purchase if they will even do that.
Don wrote:
This is a good part of the reason I user Linux, the other part being that it is a far superior platform anyway.
I don't mind paying for things that are worth the money - but it really irks me to spend money on a product that produces inferior compiles for the AMD platform. It seems like anything these big corporations are involved in comes with strings attached and nasty tricks. If I bought this I would probably then have to buy something else to make it work the way I want.
Don't get me wrong. I don't mind paying for what is worth the money too. The problem is that they are always finding a new way to earn more, even by changing functionalities to fit in a given monetization model. Recently I bought an activation key of chessbase to be able to use the premium version of the chessbase light. I wanted to test my chess engine in the so called "engine's room". For my surprise, I would have to buy another activation key to enter in that room. Please.... Ok, I gonna stick with FICS and Linux. No more hassle.
With the MS OS itself, the string attached is that you are not really buying the OS, you are purchasing the "right" to use it and only then under a bunch of restrictions. Another string is that whenever I purchase a computer I am almost always purchasing one of these licences, even though I don't want it and the first thing I do is format the hard drive. That is why I build my own machines now even though I don't really like to mess with hardware.
Yes, I know you can purchase computers with Linux installed, but it's not always the one you want - you have to go to extra trouble often to get the price of windows taken off the purchase if they will even do that.
2010 was a nice step up from 2008. From what I can remember, the version that is packaged with Express is the same optimizing compiler that comes with Ultimate. The performance is very close to that of Intel's compiler. When optimizing Stockfish a couple months back using pgo's the difference in speed was less than 5%, comparing Intel's C++ 11.1 compiler with VS2010, with the latter lagging slightly behind. Most of my efforts went towards optimizing the Intel build so the real difference is probably less.
Intell Paralell Studio XE 2011
Microsoft .NET Framework 2.0(64bits)
Microsoft Silverligth 3.0
Microsoft Visual C++ Expres 2008
Microsoft Visual Studio 2010 (2005,2008)
Microsoft Visual Studio Expres 2010
Microsoft Windows perfomance Toolkit
Microsoft Windows SDK v7.0
Not needed but if all I have everything installed,
Now catch an example written in 64 bits and run, if OK, enjoy
examples the engines , I've found fire and Stokfish, I remember....
if you install Intell Compiler after Visual, will tell you if you qualify (requisites)
