Top-of-trunk clang from http://llvm.org/apt/ takes ~2.1 seconds on my machine to preprocess the file to /dev/null. warp (compiled with -O4 -frelease -fno-bounds-check) takes ~2.8 seconds.
So this test case is faster with clang even without precompiled headers. It is hard to make a benchmark for clang's precompiled headers because the AST is lazy-loaded from the PCH. You would have to actually have code use values from the header.
EDIT: I forgot another advantage of clang: the preprocessing and compilation and assembly are all done within the same process, eliminating process creation overhead.
http://clang.llvm.org/docs/Modules.html
When they're usable for C++, there should be little reason to use any special preprocessor, since every header file (not just a static common set) need only be compiled once into a binary format rather than being included into N source files. It can't happen any sooner for me... but as of recently, they're still very broken, so I'm still waiting.
While it seems that everybody has almost the same idea how modules should look as part of the language almost no one can agree on how they should be specified or what part of a module should actually be specified at all.
As long as there is only one compiler and no guarantee that you will not have to change everything once again as standardization is complete no one is going to touch a large cross-platform codebase and add module support.
Nope, it's not, for all X.
I know of a project that takes around 3 hours to build with Clang when you do a "make all".