New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
The official Windows builds are much slower than the static Clang builds #2268
Comments
I noticed this too. Binaries produced from MSVC are a lot slower than clang build. Also, clang 16 builds are faster than clang 15. |
Can you check if this is still the case with version 10.1? We reduced the number of allocations, which could explain some of those speed differences. |
There are a little bit of differences in higher efforts, but lower efforts are more pronounced, but probably fast enough to not be noticed. |
Would you be able to verify whether the build artefacts in https://github.com/libjxl/libjxl/actions/runs/8146246627 solve the issue? |
v0.10.1 release and Github artifacts binaries comparison I compared my local MSVC and Clang-Cl build with the same commit, and the result is consistent, with Clang-Cl being faster. |
What CPU are you running this on? |
Edit: cmake configurations |
Looking at the configure step of the Github actions, it seems like it was still being compiled by MSVC, not Clang-Cl. That explains this discrepancy.
https://github.com/libjxl/libjxl/actions/runs/8146246627/job/22264345808
If the build system is not specified, CMake is defaulted to MSBuild. MSBuild silently ignores the |
Release builds for Windows are much slower than static Clang builds, especially for fast speeds
ProcProfile64:
clang v0.9.0 [cjxl e1 lossless]
119,771,153 -> 52,094,805: 43.49%. Cpu 349 mb/s (0.327 sec), real 318 mb/s (0.359 sec) = 91%. ram 401144 KB, vmem 569556 KB
git build v0.8.1 [cjxl e1 lossless]
119,771,153 -> 51,493,245: 42.99%. Cpu 78 mb/s (1.453 sec), real 78 mb/s (1.452 sec) = 100%. ram 402340 KB, vmem 569940 KB
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: