SPEC CPU result comparison

Comparison of x86_64 levels - Summer 2022

SPEC2017 INTrate: LTO -O2 - Different x86_64 levels

-flto -O2

AMD EPYC 7543P (zen3 based Milan)

Run-times

Benchmark x86-64 x86-64-v2 x86-64-v3 x86-64-v2 x86-64-v3
500.perlbench_r 100.00% 99.19% 100.40% 100.00% 101.22%
502.gcc_r 100.00% 100.00% 99.40% 100.00% 99.40%
505.mcf_r 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
520.omnetpp_r 100.00% 97.35% 98.78% 100.00% 101.46%
523.xalancbmk_r 100.00% 100.62% 103.53% 100.00% 102.89%
525.x264_r 100.00% 99.40% 98.19% 100.00% 98.78%
531.deepsjeng_r 100.00% 96.15% 93.91% 100.00% 97.68%
541.leela_r 100.00% 98.80% 100.00% 100.00% 101.22%
548.exchange2_r 100.00% 100.00% 101.02% 100.00% 101.02%
557.xz_r 100.00% 101.85% 102.26% 100.00% 100.40%
The compiler used was GCC 12.1.0.
Naturally, the smaller the run-times, the better. On the other hand, rates and especially their geometric means are better when they are greater.
See also continuous gcc tuning benchmarking at https://lnt.opensuse.org/db_default/v4/SPEC/spec_report/tuning.

Non-debug executable sizes

Click to display/hide
Benchmark x86-64 x86-64-v2 x86-64-v3 x86-64-v2 x86-64-v3
500.perlbench_r 100.00% 99.96% 100.02% 100.00% 100.05%
502.gcc_r 100.00% 99.98% 100.21% 100.00% 100.23%
505.mcf_r 100.00% 100.09% 100.78% 100.00% 100.69%
520.omnetpp_r 100.00% 99.92% 100.53% 100.00% 100.61%
523.xalancbmk_r 100.00% 99.98% 100.61% 100.00% 100.63%
525.x264_r 100.00% 99.48% 99.37% 100.00% 99.89%
531.deepsjeng_r 100.00% 99.99% 99.99% 100.00% 100.00%
541.leela_r 100.00% 99.99% 100.96% 100.00% 100.97%
548.exchange2_r 100.00% 100.00% 102.38% 100.00% 102.38%
557.xz_r 100.00% 99.97% 100.03% 100.00% 100.06%
Smaller binary sizes are always better.

Intel Cascade Lake Xeon

Run-times

Benchmark x86-64 x86-64-v2 x86-64-v3 x86-64-v2 x86-64-v3
500.perlbench_r 100.00% 99.40% 100.00% 100.00% 100.61%
502.gcc_r 100.00% 100.40% 99.60% 100.00% 99.19%
505.mcf_r 100.00% 97.77% 99.19% 100.00% 101.45%
520.omnetpp_r 100.00% 97.53% 97.94% 100.00% 100.42%
523.xalancbmk_r 100.00% 96.79% 98.59% 100.00% 101.87%
525.x264_r 100.00% 100.00% 97.78% 100.00% 97.78%
531.deepsjeng_r 100.00% 95.67% 92.37% 100.00% 96.55%
541.leela_r 100.00% 99.59% 101.22% 100.00% 101.63%
548.exchange2_r 100.00% 100.00% 101.43% 100.00% 101.43%
557.xz_r 100.00% 102.74% 102.32% 100.00% 99.59%
The compiler used was GCC 12.1.0.
Naturally, the smaller the run-times, the better. On the other hand, rates and especially their geometric means are better when they are greater.
See also continuous gcc tuning benchmarking at https://lnt.opensuse.org/db_default/v4/SPEC/spec_report/tuning.

Non-debug executable sizes

Click to display/hide
Benchmark x86-64 x86-64-v2 x86-64-v3 x86-64-v2 x86-64-v3
500.perlbench_r 100.00% 99.96% 100.02% 100.00% 100.05%
502.gcc_r 100.00% 99.98% 100.21% 100.00% 100.23%
505.mcf_r 100.00% 100.09% 100.78% 100.00% 100.69%
520.omnetpp_r 100.00% 99.92% 100.53% 100.00% 100.61%
523.xalancbmk_r 100.00% 99.98% 100.61% 100.00% 100.63%
525.x264_r 100.00% 99.48% 99.37% 100.00% 99.89%
531.deepsjeng_r 100.00% 99.99% 99.99% 100.00% 100.00%
541.leela_r 100.00% 99.99% 100.96% 100.00% 100.97%
548.exchange2_r 100.00% 100.00% 102.38% 100.00% 102.38%
557.xz_r 100.00% 99.97% 100.03% 100.00% 100.06%
Smaller binary sizes are always better.