ARM MacBook vs. Intel MacBook: A SIMD Benchmark

Re:ARM MacBook vs. Intel MacBook: A SIMD Benchmark by bacon_blood on Sunday December 13, 2020 @04:06PM (#25410278)

Both x86 and arm clang can output for the other architecture, or universal.

Pass `-arch arm64` not `-march`

You can also `clang -arch x86_64 -arch arm64` to build for both at once.

You can even go a step further and run your clang as native from bazel, via `arch -arm64 clang`.

Put it all together and you have: `arch -arm64 clang -arch x86_64 -arch arm64`.

It may seem like I'm joking but I'm not.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:ARM MacBook vs. Intel MacBook: A SIMD Benchmark by shepmaster on Sunday December 13, 2020 @04:11PM (#25410322)

Why does my native application compiled on Apple Silicon sometimes build as arm64 and sometimes build as x86_64?

Why does my native arm64 application built using an x86_64 build system fail to be code signed unless I remove the previous executable?

[1] https://stackoverflow.com/questions/64830635/why-does-my-nat...

[2] https://stackoverflow.com/questions/64830671/why-does-my-nat...

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:ARM MacBook vs. Intel MacBook: A SIMD Benchmark by haberman on Sunday December 13, 2020 @04:51PM (#25410696)

Thanks for the tips. I'm unable to replicate my previous experiment re: -arch. When I compile a wrapper program that does an exec() of clang, it is able to build arm64 or x86_64 even if the wrapper is built as x86_64.

The "arch" command is handy, thanks for that.

[ Parent | on HN ]