🛠️Wild Lags Behind Mold in Linker Benchmarks
Wild's Linker Benchmarks Fall Short
TL;DR
Mold's latest linker benchmarks show Wild lagging behind, with significant performance differences. Wild's benchmarks run on tmpfs, while Mold uses ext4, affecting results. Wild's next release will include OS-specific tweaks for better performance.
Mold has updated its linker benchmarks, including Wild for the first time. Wild's performance is substantially slower than Mold's, with ratios of 1.2x, 1.2x, 0.8x, and 1.0x for various programs. Mold's benchmarks were run on a 64-core Threadripper and an Apple M1 Ultra, while Wild's were on a 16-core Ryzen 9955hx. The differences in benchmark configurations, such as file output and tmpfs usage, significantly impact results. Wild's next release will include OS-specific tweaks for faster performance.
Key Points
Mold's benchmarks run on a 64-core Threadripper and an Apple M1 Ultra, providing a robust comparison.
Wild's benchmarks use tmpfs to reduce noise, while Mold uses ext4 for more realistic performance.
Mold's benchmarks show 1.81, 0.81, 0.20, and 0.15 seconds for blender-debug, godot-debug, blender-release, and clang-release, respectively.
Wild's benchmarks show 2.23, 1.11, 0.30, and 0.21 seconds for the same programs, indicating a performance gap.
Wild's next release will include OS-specific tweaks, such as fallocate and hugepages, to improve performance.
Why It Matters
If you're running linker benchmarks, the choice between Mold and Wild can significantly impact performance. Mold's benchmarks, run on realistic configurations, show a clear advantage. Wild's next release will include optimizations, but for now, Mold offers better performance.
Comments
Be the first to comment
Enjoyed this article?
Get it daily. 7am. Free. Reads in 5 minutes.
Join 3,483 builders reading daily.