Visual Studio Profiling Available With VS2010 Beta

[brianr]

I have been using VS2008 with the Express Edition which does not include code performance profiling.
I just downloaded Visual Studio Team System 2010 Team Suite Beta 1 to see if it might be included.
It is under the Analyze tab!

Free beta download link here:
http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/deta ... laylang=en

PS It also cleanly supports x64 without having to change libraries and properties manually.

[CThinker]

I have been using VS2008 with the Express Edition which does not include code performance profiling.
I just downloaded Visual Studio Team System 2010 Team Suite Beta 1 to see if it might be included.
It is under the Analyze tab!

Free beta download link here:
http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/deta ... laylang=en

PS It also cleanly supports x64 without having to change libraries and properties manually.

The C/C++ compiler in the Windows Platform SDK has always supported profiling since 3 years ago. You can always download that for free.

DDK also supports profiling and can be downloaded for free.

VS, SDK and DDK all share the same compiler.

[brianr]

I had profiling with VS2003 and 2005, IIRC (back when I had an MSDN subscription).

I have been using VS2008 Express Edition for some time and also have the SDK (which also supports x64), but have not found profiling.

What have I been missing?

[diep]

I have been using VS2008 with the Express Edition which does not include code performance profiling.
I just downloaded Visual Studio Team System 2010 Team Suite Beta 1 to see if it might be included.
It is under the Analyze tab!

Free beta download link here:
http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/deta ... laylang=en

PS It also cleanly supports x64 without having to change libraries and properties manually.

Hi,

Downloading the iso.
Is it faster for you than visual studio 2005 was?
Until when does this work this compiler, as i remember previous beta's had expiration date?

Vincent

p.s. in 2005 editions with all MSDN cd's (team edition) there was no profiling there.
who needs profiling anyway in companies, how could you write code that's not fast?

[CThinker]

I had profiling with VS2003 and 2005, IIRC (back when I had an MSDN subscription).

I have been using VS2008 Express Edition for some time and also have the SDK (which also supports x64), but have not found profiling.

What have I been missing?

Just to check, I installed 2003 Platform SDK SP1, which was released in February of 2005.

When you run "cl /?", you will find that you have the option:
/GL[-] enable link-time code generation

When you run "link /?", you will find that you have the option:
/LTCG[:{NOSTATUS|PGINSTRUMENT|PGOPTIMIZE|PGUPDATE|STATUS}]

I don't have the RTM 2003 PSDK, but I'm pretty sure that it too had the profiling options.

The free MS Dev tools have had profiling for more than 6 years now.

[diep]

I had profiling with VS2003 and 2005, IIRC (back when I had an MSDN subscription).

I have been using VS2008 Express Edition for some time and also have the SDK (which also supports x64), but have not found profiling.

What have I been missing?

Just to check, I installed 2003 Platform SDK SP1, which was released in February of 2005.

When you run "cl /?", you will find that you have the option:
/GL[-] enable link-time code generation

When you run "link /?", you will find that you have the option:
/LTCG[:{NOSTATUS|PGINSTRUMENT|PGOPTIMIZE|PGUPDATE|STATUS}]

I don't have the RTM 2003 PSDK, but I'm pretty sure that it too had the profiling options.

The free MS Dev tools have had profiling for more than 6 years now.

You're referring to PGO here not to profiling.
PGO is profile guided optimization, however that doesn't profile your program like vtune does do. Note NET2003 doesn't have pgo at all.
That was introduced indeed in 2005 as you show.

Note i checked all MSDN cdroms around 2007 for profiling this and repeatedly people posted past years everything with respect to missing a profiler in CCC and other forums.

Note diep i profiled under linux or with some other tool, so wasn't desperate there. vtune is more accurate of course in profiling for intel hardware.

So with respect to diep i do not really need it badly, as m$ of course is going to be very inaccurate for what % system time the memory controller actually eats.

This is why so many are happy about Nehalem. It has good latency to RAM.

Yet in reality it isn't faster at all than core2 except for latency to RAM.

So for diep it is hardly faster than core2 at the same Ghz speed without turbo boost.

Yet for some engines it 'flies' suddenly. Profilers just are very inaccurate usually for the actual hardware issues such as ram latency.

vtune did do a reasonable job there.
the 'public' tools do not.
so it will be interesting to see how m$ with visual studio 2010 is doing there.

Vincent

[CThinker]

I had profiling with VS2003 and 2005, IIRC (back when I had an MSDN subscription).

I have been using VS2008 Express Edition for some time and also have the SDK (which also supports x64), but have not found profiling.

What have I been missing?

Just to check, I installed 2003 Platform SDK SP1, which was released in February of 2005.

When you run "cl /?", you will find that you have the option:
/GL[-] enable link-time code generation

When you run "link /?", you will find that you have the option:
/LTCG[:{NOSTATUS|PGINSTRUMENT|PGOPTIMIZE|PGUPDATE|STATUS}]

I don't have the RTM 2003 PSDK, but I'm pretty sure that it too had the profiling options.

The free MS Dev tools have had profiling for more than 6 years now.

You're referring to PGO here not to profiling.
PGO is profile guided optimization, however that doesn't profile your program like vtune does do. Note NET2003 doesn't have pgo at all.
That was introduced indeed in 2005 as you show.

Note i checked all MSDN cdroms around 2007 for profiling this and repeatedly people posted past years everything with respect to missing a profiler in CCC and other forums.

Note diep i profiled under linux or with some other tool, so wasn't desperate there. vtune is more accurate of course in profiling for intel hardware.

So with respect to diep i do not really need it badly, as m$ of course is going to be very inaccurate for what % system time the memory controller actually eats.

This is why so many are happy about Nehalem. It has good latency to RAM.

Yet in reality it isn't faster at all than core2 except for latency to RAM.

So for diep it is hardly faster than core2 at the same Ghz speed without turbo boost.

Yet for some engines it 'flies' suddenly. Profilers just are very inaccurate usually for the actual hardware issues such as ram latency.

vtune did do a reasonable job there.
the 'public' tools do not.
so it will be interesting to see how m$ with visual studio 2010 is doing there.

Vincent

I am talking about profiling.

In linux/gcc
1. compile with -g -pg
2. run the app
3. run gprof
4. the output tells you how much time each function ran, and how many times it was called

In windows cl/link
1. compile/line with GL/LTCG options
2. run the app
3. run pgomgr
4. the output tells you how much time each function ran, and how many times it was called, including how much time is spent on blocks of code

[Kirill Kryukov]

Until when does this work this compiler, as i remember previous beta's had expiration date?

This one is limited too:

3. TIME-SENSITIVE SOFTWARE. The software will stop running 240 days after you install it or on April 15, 2010, whichever comes first. You will not receive any other notice. You may not be able to access data used with the software when it stops running.

I prefer SDK.

[brianr]

Thanks for the feedback.
You mentioned the 2003 and 2005 versions; I am asking about 2008 (when profiling was moved to a more expensive version, I think).

Also, there were 64 bit support issues with the older versions, IIRC, supporting intrinsics or something for the newer processors.

In any case, it does not look like PGOMGR.EXE is part of Visual Studio Express or the SDK (versions 6.1 or 7.0) other than for IA64. It is part of the 2010 Beta.

If I have missed something, please let me know.
Thanks.

[frankp]

http://www.linux-magazine.com/online/ne ... _functions