Clang vs gcc benchmark. GCC benchmarks atop FreeBSD 11.

Clang vs gcc benchmark Nowadays, I compiled two different executable from two compiler (LLVM and gcc), and ran 100,000 times on both of them. but would like to see evidence to the contrary. run in the VS development prompt will get it working with the normal clang frontend, so you can use the You can drop this into gcc. Clang (/ ˈ k l æ ŋ /) [7] is a compiler front end for the programming languages C, C++, Objective-C, Objective-C++, and the software frameworks OpenMP, [8] OpenCL, RenderScript, CUDA, SYCL, and HIP. This article isn't about looking at the Core i9 vs. The Clang-built binaries of the uvg266 H. 7 still has the lead, I haven't seen conclusive benchmarks yet), but for students to learn it does not really matter anyway. Build tool GCC has a 1% to 4% performance advantage over Clang and LLVM for most programs at the O2 and O3 levels, and on average has an approximately 3% performance advantage for SPEC CPU2017 INT Speed. When Richard Stallman started the GNU project in 1984, the purported aim was to make a complete Unix-like operating system as free software. I know they are different type of compiler even different architecture. Upstream LLVM/Clang performance was looking good for LC0 over GCC but the AOCC 4. GCC compiler/toolchain debate. The performance test should do the most common things that the app being tested is used for. As for compiler performance in building out some sample projects, compiling Apache was quite close between GCC and Clang but sided in favor of the LLVM-based compiler. gcc. IAR consistently benchmarks near or at the top for code efficiency among ARM compilers. data sections) so thats what I was aiming for as well. The different binaries were quite close with the SVT-AV1 open-source AV1 video encoder benchmarking. Sometimes this has a huge payoff. In terms of 600. GCC 13 Compiler Performance On Intel Raptor Lake For those wondering how the recent releases of the Clang 16 and GCC 13 are competing for the fastest generated binaries of these leading open-source compilers, here is a fresh round of benchmarks from an Intel Core i9 13900K "Raptor Lake" system looking at the performance for GCC 13 vs. The c++ code compiled by clang runs a lot faster than the same code compiled by MSVC. CMake can be used with Make so GCC can I've noticed msvc misses a lot of simd optimisations that clang and gcc catch. So the free would need to learn to distinguish regular (non-aligned) vs aligned allocations and act accordingly. 0 SVN and GCC 8. Michael Larabel is the principal author of Phoronix. So if you are working in *nix world GCC is surely your daily driver. 03 Benchmarks Game. GCC and Clang from the user's point of view are nearly 100% identical. PGO may depend on the standard library used (libc++ or libstdc++), but we will try to use the most common combinations of compilers and linkers. Clang attempts to unroll loops really, really aggressively. The templated (generic) C++ source checks about 3 times slower than the non-generic one using gcc This paper reports a performance-based comparison of six state-of-the-art C/C++ compilers: AOCC, Clang, G++, Intel C++ compiler, PGC++, and Zapcc. 28/08/2018 In ARM, C, C++, Compilers. Recently we have been running a number of compiler benchmarks looking at the recently released LLVM Clang 12 and GCC 11 open-source code compilers. Our benchmark results show that neither compiler wins across all categories. Phoronix hosts a bunch of interesting benchmarks in this area. Usually it's marginally faster with GCC. 35 Comments. Summary Table: GCC vs Clang; Conclusion; Differences between GCC and Clang. 5. LLVM Clang 20 Performance On AMD Zen 5. From what I have heard, both GCC and Clang do code analyses and change the resulted code with a more optimized version. Discover which compiler delivers faster code execution for your projects. 9. 0 compilers in a range of benchmarks. E Pure guesswork on my side but one huge difference of Clang vs. 2). In the actual GCC 15 vs. . You cannot use the VS debugger for GCC code. 8. 79GHz (64 Cores / 128 Threads) System76 Thelio Major (FA Z5 BIOS) AMD Device 14a4 4 x 32GB DDR5-4800MT/s Micron MTC20F1045S1RC48BA2 1000GB CT1000T700SSD5 AMD Radeon Pro W7900 45GB AMD Windows users have choices when it comes to C++ programming. text and . However, for my purposes, I find that clang has much inferior diagnostics (and sometimes inferior code) so I still use GCC as my primary compiler and just use clang as a backup. 2. 4 which is the fastest at compiling code with optimizations. Clang 17 were tested as what's GCC has a 1% to 4% performance advantage over Clang and LLVM for most programs at the O2 and O3 levels, and on average has an approximately 3% performance advantage for SPEC CPU2017 INT Speed. You may choose to stick with the regular Visual Studio. GCC Compiler Comparison On Ubuntu 16. • "performance measurements that can be used to compare compute-intensive workloads on different computer systems. Clang vs GCC performance numbers This is in reference to #5951 (comment) On an i9-7980XE under Windows comparing Clang 20. ) runtime performance with GCC and Clang. Also GCC supports more legacy languages ( like Fortran, ADA). Clang 18 - AMD Ryzen Threadripper 7980X OpenBenchmarking. [9] It acts as a drop-in replacement for the GNU Compiler Collection (GCC), supporting most of its compiling flags and unofficial language extensions. Even at -O2: Clang's loop unrolling attempts at -O2 are more aggressive than GCC's loop unrolling attempts at -O3. But for some workloads there were significant differences between the compilers: As was originally the case on AArch64 and has been commonly the case on x86_64 in recent times, the performance of binaries built by LLVM Clang can match or exceed that of the long-used GCC compiler. In some benchmarks as shown GCC can still outpace Clang. Overall for the video encode benchmarks the results tend to be quite close due to most encoders relying on a lot of hand-tuned code. Clang C/C++ compiler performance of various resulting application Last week I posted a number of fresh GCC vs. Still, the program compiled by Clang gains a 10% benefit of speed. 0 on various CPUs following that updated LLVM compiler stack release earlier this year. LLVM Clang 12 given these fresh open-source compiler releases, today's comparison is looking at the Core i9 11900K "Rocket Lake" performance. 2, no preprocessor differentiation was needed anymore between the code ranges that GCC would compile and the Clang alternatives. Went further down the rabbit hole, and it's a bug in how Glibc (the GNU C library) and GCC do malloc. Sometimes a program is a lot faster when compiled with GCC, sometimes it's a lot faster with clang. The C++ dynamic_cast is supposed to be used on a pointer to a class, not on the C gcc C clang - Which programs have fastest performance? How the programs are written matters! Always look at the source code. I think your research thus far shows that swapping between current version of Clang or GCC vs. LLVM Clang compiler performance benchmarks on AArch64. Indeed, clang-4. GCC C/C++ compiler performance is comparing as we end out 2017, here are some recent benchmarks using the latest Clang 6. Each has a unique design philosophy and architecture that caters to different needs and preferences. 1. But why gcc always beat LLVM on performance? What is the reason? For the vast majority of benchmarks the LLVM Clang vs. I'm not able to find the numbers right now for GCC without LTO, but I recall it was still faster than ICC. Comparing these results with those for GCC 4. Clang 17 were tested as what's readily available on Ubuntu 23. GCC 8. 2 benchmarks on Zen 3, there is nice incremental improvement compared to the prior 3. bzip2. In previous GCC vs Clang threads, the sensible suggestion to use Clang during development and then (possibly) GCC for shipping builds has been raised. GCC uses its own IR generation where Clang uses LLVM IR. " • Family of benchmarks: SPEC2006, SPEC2017. Threadripper performance as much as it is looking at the GCC 8 vs. “Your mileage may vary,” as they say. There is as healthy and competitive competition as ever between GCC and Clang with the mainline Linux kernel these days working well under Clang, more software projects shifting to Clang by default, and Rust C clang - Which programs have fastest performance? How the programs are written matters! Always look at the source code. In addition to being efficient when pitted head-to-head against GCC in batch mode, clang is built with GCC 14 vs. 10 Comments. When talking about optimization, and "reliability", Clang wins because of the LLVM. I never tested Clang but I know ICC was the slowest I tested. Phoronix: Healthy Competition With GCC 15 vs. The Clang-built Liquid-DSP software defined radio software was providing measurable advantages over the GCC-built binaries. The Clang project enjoys the support of Clang seems to have recently done a lot of optimizations regarding compilation time. 7. e. GNU – The free, open source compiler from the GNU Project, part of the GCC compiler collection. I created in the same C++ library (GCC) in each case and performed all comparisons consecutively oggenc. When it came to building the ImageMagick program, With our initial AMD AOCC 3. g. For those wondering how the LLVM Clang vs. 8 while testing each compiler with a variety of different optimization levels. In When I use the 'strchr' method in the standard library; GCC's run time reducing to 0. Recently using Linux When taking the geometric mean of all the raw performance metrics, Clang 16 was faster than GCC 13 overall by about 6% on this Intel Raptor Lake system running Fedora Workstation 38. Healthy Competition With GCC 15 vs. If you get it to target Core2s with SSE3, the performance increase over G++ is even greater, but the AMDs suffer quite heavily with the code. LLVM Clang 16 compiler performance on Raptor Lake as Intel's latest-generation desktop processors. LLVM Clang 16 compiler benchmark comparison will be The performance of both GCC and Clang gets significanly worse with each new release (currently 8, 9, 10 in the table below). And I checked the ASM code, found out that clang automatically uses SIMD instructions for speed purposes. FreeBSD 11. LLVM has its own compiler front-end, clang, for C and C++, but it is not nearly as complete or mature as the GNU Compiler Collection. 0 vs. Developers praise the high optimization levels GCC vs Clang Cortex-M4 benchmarks. But on the other hand Clang+LLVM reduces compilation time for single threaded applications by 5-10% . So I rewrite the main calculation part by using AVX Intrinsics code. GCC’s main popularity lies in the fact that it is the only option to compile Linux kernel. If you write Rust code full of iterators, then it compiles much slower than equivalent C++ code that uses only for loops. 2, all the same except the preprocessors. AMD AOCC 4. GCC 11: 54 s: AWS/Linux: Intel Ice Lake processor: LLVM 14: 54 s: WSL (Microsoft Laptop) I think it worth to report such performance gap between clang-cl and native msvc cl for the release mode at least with minimal reproduce code. LLVM Clang 20 Performance On AMD Zen 5 Article on Phoronix there are several Benchmarks where the llvm 20 preview is slower then llvm 19 and / or GCC 15 preview on AMD EPYC 9575F with "-O3 -march=native -flto". Page 4 of 8. Clang is actually the front-end component. Ada; Clang; Intel C; C++; Fortran; Pascal How the programs are written matters! Always look at To get VS to use GCC as a compiler, you'd pretty much need to turn to makefiles or custom build steps all the way. If you like to play with the latest language and library additions like I do you’re better off with GCC or Clang anyway. What could be the reason for this major performance difference? MSVC The -march=native runs appeared to significantly hurt Clang's performance with the HINT benchmark, but aside from that it was performing quite well against the GNU Compiler Collection. I found that the performance of executable from gcc always better than LLVM one. godbolt. Clang On POWER8 Is A Competitive Compiler Match Software : 2016-02-21: It would seem to me that there is no drop in alternative to Clang. Let us know in the forums what your experience has been if evaluating different compilers for your own code-base. LLVM Clang 20 Performance On AMD Zen 5 In the recent discussion over the GNU Gold linker being deprecated, there was the usual LLVM vs. While having the Supermicro ARS-211M-NR R13SPD server in the lab for AmpereOne benchmarking with the flagship AmpereOne A192-32X processor, I took the opportunity to run some fresh GCC vs. Written by Michael Larabel in Software on 18 November 2022 at 10:42 AM EST. LLVM Clang Compiler Benchmarks On Zen 4. GCC benchmarks atop FreeBSD 11. 1 to GCC 14. perlbench_s and 602. The C++ Compilers. The OpenMP Graphics-Magick performance was mixed based on the particular imaging operation whether GCC or Clang was faster on this Core i9 13900K Fedora Workstation setup. GCC 9 vs. Written by Michael Larabel in Software on 28 December 2023 at 07:27 AM EST. Two points to Clang, one point to GCC. All dependencies are of course installed with vcpkg exactly in the same way. Page 7 of 8. The SMHasher results varied with the different crypto algorithms tested. org Phoronix Test Suite AMD Ryzen Threadripper 7980X 64-Cores @ 7. Clang 18 excels with aggressive optimization flags and performs better on SIMD-heavy computational tasks. GCC is the only one I think doing what makes the most sense (for maximum throughput) to me. C++20 support is lagging in Clang for a lot of reasons, including the fact that Clang currently has no real mid-level representation (by comparison, GCC has something like 37 internal IRs). 2, it stands out that GCC has Let us discuss GCC first. You'd be much better off compiling from the commandline and using CMake or something similar. Firstly, clang and llvm are written in c++ so it's much easier for me to work with. It's by no means a general statement on ICC's performance, but the results were sufficient for us to go ahead with GCC 4. 13 Comments. Those flags included: MinGW GCC; Clang-cl (MSVC toolchain) MinGW Clang; LTO also depends on the linker used. c failed on musl and the gcc+glib+flto+Os performed better than the others. About The Author. It's important, then, to not only perform the benchmark, but to specifically note what you're benchmarking, and under what situations. Replacing the memory allocation subroutines with TC malloc, JE malloc or HOARD malloc all yielded *massive* uplifts in performance, leading to GCC-12 surpassing ICC and CLANG-11 (when those 2 are using GLIBC malloc) Performance benchmarks of GCC 9 Compiler Benchmarking vs. If the fastest programs are flagged * possible hand-written vector instructions or "unsafe" or naked ffi, does the host language matter?You might be more interested in the less optimised programs — more seconds, less gz source code. 04 LTS release will be sticking to GCC 13 while on the LLVM side it should be shipping Clang 18 so it will be interesting to see what performance changes are there for that next six-month compiler update. Compiler Benchmarks Of GCC, LLVM-GCC, DragonEgg, Clang; ∶ (Lots of luvverly colours. Today are some complementary tests when benchmarking GCC 5. On the Apple M1 the performance was close and GCC in good standing. Written by Michael Larabel in Software on 11 February 2025 at 01:03 PM EST. Object code can also be freely linked. 04 LTS and with the testing from a Xeon Skylake system. (Remember – this was before the advent of Linux and an operating system that can be a drop-in replacement for Unix while being free was a noble g Here's a fresh look at the GCC vs. The performance in terms of generated code between gcc and Clang is now unclear (though I think that gcc 4. Same information as GCC, but, unlike GCC, it goes directly to the point and asks if we meant "std::cout", then shows the implementation. Clang uses lld as its linker. GCC is that Clang by default allows inlining of interposable functions in shared libraries (see e. For most general-purpose applications, GCC 14 aligned_alloc is impossible to implement in MSVC without breaking ABI, and they don't want or could not break ABI. In Clang 3. The problem is that aligned allocations need to be freed by regular free. GCC performance was quite close, as we've come to see over the years on various AArch64 single board computers and server platforms. Benchmarking compilers for embedded platforms is always about binary size (. GCC 14 vs. The Clang-built binaries for the Kvazaar H. Page 6 of 8. org and see the Clang, ICC, and GCC output. We measure two aspects of the compilers’ performance: The speed of compiled Here's a fresh look at the GCC vs. First up is a look at the GCC 9 vs. Clang 17 Compiler Benchmarks, Early Clang 18 & GCC 14 Development Benchmarks As it's been a while since last delivering any competitive GCC versus LLVM Clang compiler competitive analysis and with the year quickly drawing a close, here's a fresh look at the GCC vs. Clang C/C++ compiler performance of various resulting application binaries tested on x86_64. GCC uses ld as the linker with support for ld-gold. Written by Michael Larabel in Software on 24 April 2024 at 11:02 AM EDT. 1 is much faster for compilation than clang-3. So let's begin. Score: Clang: 8, GCC: 4, MSVC: 4. How the programs are written matters! Always look at the source code. 0 tested using Fishbench. LLVM Clang. This violates ELF interposition rules but usually allows to perform more aggressive optimizations. Clang uses LLVM in the backend. 2 and Clang 3. This article explores the fundamental design differences between GCC and Clang, highlighting how these differences GCC has a 1% to 4% performance advantage over Clang and LLVM for most programs at the O2 and O3 levels, and on average has an approximately 3% performance advantage for SPEC CPU2017 INT Speed. Page 2 of 5. Clang/LLVM is designed for a high degree of compatibility with GCC. The SVT video encoder performance results tended to be quite close between tested compilers, after all many video encoders rely on hand-tuned Assembly code. Quick measurements on the recent benchmark "show" that rustc is about twice as slow as clang/gcc. Page 5 of 5. I compared test equipment performance between GCC 4. Interestingly in the case of Sysbench, the AMD performance was faster when built by the GCC compiler while the Intel systems performed much better with the Clang compiler. The reaosn why I vastly prefer clang is for three main reasons. Here are those results for that healthy competition between these open-source That's where things stand right now in the Clang vs. 1 and LLVM Clang 3. GCC 14 delivers better performance for template metaprogramming and generally produces faster code with default optimization settings. To see more of these GCC vs. LLVM/Clang – An open source compiler infrastructure spearheaded by Apple focused on speed and modularity. •Sub-suites for measuring integer and floating-point performance. So, my questions are: Why there is huge performace difference between my 'strchr_x' and the standard library's 'strchr' in GCC? Why there is this huge performace gap between in GCC and Clang? As part of our ongoing benchmarks of GCC 11 vs. And as @Cheersandhth says, it's good to use two compilers. 04 LTS Software : 2016-02-26: GCC vs. C gcc versus Free Pascal. While benchmarking the three compilers on the two systems, the CFLAGS/CXXFLAGS were set to "-O3 -march=native" for looking at the Thus Clang is born . *. Clang has been improving in recent times, but some portions are still incomplete (largely with C++). 2 and clang 3. I'm pretty sure that TCC doesn't do that but I would expect that TCC does at least things like Register allocation cause the code would be hundreds of times slower than the other two. not only improve SPEC. com and founded the site in 2004 with a focus on enriching the Linux hardware experience. Going back a decade or so GCC tended to consistently lead while these days is a very nice and When I build my code on Windows using Visual Studio, the compilation time is signficantly lower than if I build my code on Ubuntu using WSL and GCC. With GCC 10 released earlier this month, we have begun our benchmarking of this annual feature release to the GNU Compiler Collection. So, even if Clang does not produce code quite as fast as GCC, Clang is still valuable and important to developers. Clang 8 performance on the current-generation Intel and AMD microarchitecture targets. The upcoming Ubuntu 24. 0 RC1 AMD64 on an Intel Xeon Haswell system. On the other hand, it says a lot that Chromium and Firefox forgo MSVC in favor of clang-cl. 0 Current benchmark data was generated on Mon Apr 14 2025, full log can be found HERE CONTRIBUTIONS are WELCOME! CPU INFO: [x86_64][4 cores] AMD EPYC 7763 64-Core Processor (Model 1) Redis was faster on the newer (AVX-512) CPUs with GCC where as on the other systems the performance was similar. The code base is exactly identical and uses CMake. All performance critical applications are built using GCC. If the fastest programs are flagged * possible hand-written vector instructions or "unsafe" or naked ffi, does the host clang beats GCC by a similarly important margin at each level of optimization. Linker backend – GCC Vs Clang is the most prominent here. c benchmark shows that gcc+glib+LTO+Os and gcc+musl+LTO+O3 have the same performance and much smaller size compared to others benchmarks. Practical comparison of GCC, Clang and IAR. For instance, have a look at: Benchmarking LLVM & Clang Against GCC 4. We're going to compare three compilers: The Intel C++ compiler, the GNU C++ compiler (g++), and the LLVM clang compiler. Round 8: dynamic_casting a class itself. GCC vs. With both GCC and LLVM Clang, the benchmarks were carried out three times with varying CFLAGS/CXXFLAGS. A similar GCC 13 vs. Clang C/C++ compiler benchmarks at varying optimization levels, see this OpenBenchmarking. Might be worth checking if there's a significant codegen difference where you're measuring a performance difference, though this is pretty labour intensive to do. In some of the WebP benchmarks as well as TSCP, the Clang-built binaries were much faster on this AMD Zen 4 workstation. Although GCC-7. C gcc versus 25. With some benchmarks, it is seen that lld is faster than ld and even the newer ld-gold. Compare GCC 14 and Clang 18 performance with detailed C++26 benchmarks. “LLVM-GCC is a C front-end for the Low-Level Virtual Machine but its back-end is a modified version of GCC (4. GCC is a set of the full compiler, where Clang isn't. 12 kernel bringing support for building the kernel with link-time optimizations (LTO) when using the LLVM Clang compiler, here are some benchmarks looking at that performance impact as well as more generally seeing how the LLVM Clang compiler performance is looking when building the Linux kernel relative to GCC. Page 3 of 8. But how does this AMD-optimized compiler stack up against the upstream LLVM Clang and GCC compilers? Here is a look at the AMD AOCC performance against the current Clang and GCC C/C++ compilers. 0 and GCC 13. lld performs better than ld and hence, gives Clang a performance boost compared to GCC. 3, all the GCC versions are slower than GCC-4. Right out of the gate we see the competitiveness of today's LLVM Clang compiler against GCC. With the Linux 5. 015625 seconds. [10] [11] It includes a Healthy Competition With GCC 15 vs. In a game, for We delivered many benchmarks of Clang 10. GCC is more strict in this regard by default but you can ask for the same With the recent stable releases of LLVM's Clang 16 and GCC 13 compilers there is now initial AMD Zen 4 "znver4" support in these open-source compilers. Overall though Clang remains a very capable alternative to GCC particularly on x86_64 and AArch64 architectures. this post for more details). GCC 13 vs. Practically both are well optimized, however, LLVM IR is much more robust and modular, than GCC IR. For those interested in C/C++ compiler performance, for some fun numbers to dive into this weekend are LLVM Clang vs. Michael has written more than 20,000 articles covering the state of Linux hardware support, Linux performance The LLVM Clang x86_64 performance has evolved very well over the years that the performance of the resulting binaries can typically match or exceed GCC. LLVM Clang 10 compiler C gcc Free Pascal - Which programs have fastest performance? The Computer Language 25. • Contribute generic improvements, I. The solution is to use Microsoft specific non-pirtable aligned alloc and aligned free Last week I posted various LLVM Clang and GCC compiler benchmarks using packages available on Ubuntu 16. 20GHz (18 Cores / 36 Threads), Motherboard: ASUS PRIME X299-A (1503 BIOS), Chipset: Intel Sky Lake-E DMI3 Registers, Memory: 16384MB, Disk: 240GB Force MP510, Graphics: NV120 12GB, Audio: Realtek ALC1220, Monitor: ASUS Would have to see specific benchmarks comparing and the assembly for the newest gcc and newest clang. GCC 10 vs. •We will focus on SPEC2017Int rate. Results for 200 tests for each version. 1 benchmarks on the Compile time performance is important, but when using clang as an API, often memory use is even more so: the less memory the code takes the more code you can fit into memory at a time (useful for whole program analysis tools, for example). LLVM Clang compiler performance benchmarks using an AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7995WX (Zen 4) system using the HP Z6 G5 A workstation running Ubuntu GCC with LTO was running roughly 3 times faster than ICC without LTO. Clang Benchmark Comparison At Varying Optimization Levels Software : 2016-03-03: LLVM Clang vs. If you prefer, Microsoft makes available ClangCL which couples the LLVM compiler (commonly used by Apple) with the Visual Studio backend. In In this article is a look at the GCC 13 vs. 0 numbers show there can be real benefits from the Znver4 tuning by AMD. LLVM Clang 18 Compiler Performance On Fedora 40. You seem surprised that gcc beat llvm on your benchmark. Clang 17 Compiler Benchmarks, Early Clang 18 & GCC 14 Development Benchmarks. For example GCC's libc can be linked with Clang: This popular free compiler collection uses the LLVM compiler as a back end. Phoronix: LLVM Clang 16 vs. Now, when you can use MSVC with clang as the compiler, that might be reason to stop using GCC. GCC still had an advantage over Clang in Coremark on this Ryzen Threadripper 7995WX system. GCC use ld with ld-gold while Clang uses lld. x releases. 1 is faster than GCC-6. 265 encoder tended to be slightly faster than GCC. 10 Linux plus a look ahead in using the latest GCC 14 and LLVM Clang 18 development snapshots as of this week. 266 encoder had a slight advantage over GCC on this AMD Zen 5 Linux server. That's still the case with GCC 13 and Clang 17 with frequently trading blows between the two compilers. Fortunately, with recently working on some initial benchmarks of the GCC 15 compiler I was following that up with GCC and Clang (the compiler you're referring to when you write LLVM) both support essentially equal features and both cover the entire current standard (C++17). 3. If LTO is used for Clang, it should also be used for GCC (-fwhopr) and ICC. c shows that gcc+glib+LTO+Os, gcc+musl+Os and gcc+musl+LTO+Os perform the same and better that the rest. gcc_s/O2, GCC has a great performance advantage (more than 10%). Curious about the performance difference between these two compilers on the very newest AMD 4th Gen EPYC "Genoa" server processors, I ran some LLVM Clang 16. So it's not easy to compare compilation times between the two languages. Processor: Intel Core i9-7980XE @ 4. – Phoronix: GCC 13 vs. org result file. We did at one point switch from GCC to Clang because there was a time when Clang's compile times were phenomenal and its RAM usage was very low, but now Clang's compile times are worse than GCC's (it's RAM usage is There we go. It is almost trivial to build an embedded C project that was started with GCC with Clang (unless you have used a horrible amount of GCC extensions). Stay tuned for similar benchmarks on AMD Zen 4. In terms of Build tool, GCC natively supports Make and Autotools while Clang supports CMake. 0. GCC performance on Intel Meteor Lake. xepjqyhn ogiwrv nqyzzi vuxh gkfsbbq djt paxov nzk ekabso fcwbi lvgh hpzsjnqcs yotueo puq wtauhz