-; X86-64: t4:
-; X86-64: movabsq $8680820740569200760, %rax
-; X86-64: movq %rax
-; X86-64: movq %rax
-; X86-64: movq %rax
-; X86-64: movw $120
-; X86-64: movl $2021161080
+;;; TODO: (1) Some of the loads and stores are certainly unaligned and (2) the first load and first
+;;; store overlap with the second load and second store respectively.
+;;;
+;;; Is either of the sequences ideal?
+
+; X86-64-LABEL: t4:
+; X86-64: movabsq $33909456017848440, %rax ## imm = 0x78787878787878
+; X86-64: movq %rax, -10(%rsp)
+; X86-64: movabsq $8680820740569200760, %rax ## imm = 0x7878787878787878
+; X86-64: movq %rax, -16(%rsp)
+; X86-64: movq %rax, -24(%rsp)
+; X86-64: movq %rax, -32(%rsp)
+
+; NHM_64-LABEL: t4:
+; NHM_64: movups _.str2+14(%rip), %xmm0
+; NHM_64: movups %xmm0, -26(%rsp)
+; NHM_64: movups _.str2(%rip), %xmm0
+; NHM_64: movaps %xmm0, -40(%rsp)
+