I just ordered my Sheeva and now begins the long wait. In the meantime, I'd like more information about floating point performance. I know that many benchmarks have been done and performance is very poor. However, I understand that software compiled to expect an FPU will have it's FP operations performed with illegal instruction faults on the Kirkwood -- something that's very, very inefficient. On the other hand, software can also be compiled with a software-emulated FPU: while still slow, I believe this would be considerably faster than the hardware-fault-handled FP processing.
My question is this: when people have been benchmarking Kirkwood FP performance, have they been compiling their test software using hardware-fault FP or software-emulated FP? I have a feeling it's the slower one and recompiling with the other setting might see a significant speed gain.
Am I way off base here? Obviously I plan to do some tests of my own once my Plug arrives
, but that could be weeks...