How to Bypass Matlab’s ‘Cripple AMD CPU’ Function - Overclock.net - An Overclocking Community

Forum Jump: 

How to Bypass Matlab’s ‘Cripple AMD CPU’ Function

 
Thread Tools
post #1 of 5 (permalink) Old 11-26-2019, 08:56 PM - Thread Starter
Gamer
 
paulerxx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: New Joisey
Posts: 3,396
Rep: 72 (Unique: 62)
How to Bypass Matlab’s ‘Cripple AMD CPU’ Function

https://www.extremetech.com/computin...eadripper-cpus


"When I published Matlab data in our Threadripper 3970X / Cascade Lake X joint review, it was because Intel had recommended this test and workload as a showcase for Intel’s HEDT desktop line. I specifically asked for recommendations, hoping that Intel would have some applications in mind that would show relatively light scaling at or above the 18-core mark with AVX-512 integration. Even professional apps don’t scale perfectly forever, and I knew going into this review that there was going to be a performance “island” for Intel to stand on at the intersection of higher clocks and lightly threaded applications. “Lightly,” in this context, should be understood to mean “apps that don’t scale all the way to 64 threads” as opposed to “apps that don’t scale past 4-8 threads,” which is usually what we mean when we call an app lightly threaded. It was obvious that Threadripper 3960X and 3970X were going to beat the 10980XE in every app that could scale to match their thread counts, especially in the 3970X’s case. With that as a given, it was worth exploring the areas that had historically been the strongest for Intel to see how performance would compare."

"Matlab runs notoriously slow on AMD CPUs for operations that use the Intel Math Kernel Library (MKL). This is because the Intel MKL uses a discriminative CPU Dispatcher that does not use efficient codepath according to SIMD support by the CPU, but based on the result of a vendor string query. If the CPU is from AMD, the MKL does not use SSE3-SSE4 or AVX1/2 extensions but falls back to SSE1 no matter whether the AMD CPU supports more efficient SIMD extensions like AVX2 or not."

swah
AMD 2019
(6 items)
CPU
ryzen 3600
Motherboard
x570 Phantom Gaming 4
GPU
5700XT
RAM
16GB DDR4 3200mhz
Hard Drive
m.2 512GB
Operating System
Windows 10
▲ hide details ▲
paulerxx is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 5 (permalink) Old 11-26-2019, 09:02 PM
ٴٴٴ╲⎝⧹˙͜>˙⧸⎠╱
 
TK421's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 5,477
Rep: 160 (Unique: 125)
Dev being paid to include "accidental" oversight?


Also, wrong title.

nͫٴiͤٴcͫٴeͤ੮Һ૯ ცɿ૭ ૭คעٴٴٴٴٴٴٴٴٴٴٴٴٴٴٴٴٴٴٴٴٴ ٴٴٴٴٴٴٴٴٴٴٴٴٴٴٴٴٴ ٴٴٴٴٴٴٴٴٴٴٴٴٴٴٴٴٴٴٴ ٴٴ
█▀█ █▄█ ▀█▀ ▀█▀


TK421 is offline  
post #3 of 5 (permalink) Old 11-26-2019, 11:03 PM
New to Overclock.net
 
cssorkinman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 9,575
Rep: 475 (Unique: 270)
Set flag *Intel*
cssorkinman is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #4 of 5 (permalink) Old 11-27-2019, 06:17 AM
Head Smeghead of OCN
 
Kryton's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Deep smeg ...
Posts: 3,133
Rep: 182 (Unique: 132)
Just more proof in how Intel is using their influence (wallet) to skew results in their favor.


I get it, it's not like someone else (AMD) couldn't do it and probrably has before.
Intel has been accused of this for years and in many cases it's proven as fact such as this example, crippling software compilers in their favor by having software writers/programmers pull such trickery in their stead with nice incentives to do so, straight from their pocketbook.

Kryton is offline  
post #5 of 5 (permalink) Old 11-27-2019, 01:34 PM
New to Overclock.net
 
buddywh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 234
Rep: 7 (Unique: 7)
Quote: Originally Posted by paulerxx View Post
https://www.extremetech.com/computin...eadripper-cpus


.....This is because the Intel MKL uses a discriminative CPU Dispatcher that does not use efficient codepath according to SIMD support by the CPU, but based on the result of a vendor string query. If the CPU is from AMD, the MKL does not use SSE3-SSE4 or AVX1/2 extensions but falls back to SSE1 no matter whether the AMD CPU supports more efficient SIMD extensions like AVX2 or not."
Wasn't this attempted by Intel previously (way back in the K7/K8 days if i recall) with their compilers? I thought they had agreed as part of a settlement (with SEC???) never to engage in such monopolistic tactics again.
buddywh is offline  
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the Overclock.net - An Overclocking Community forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.
User Name:
If you do not want to register, fill this field only and the name will be used as user name for your post.
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.
Password:
Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.
Email Address:

Log-in



Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off