Originally Posted by Hueristic
Yes. They did all they could to delay multi threaded aps as that was what AMD had been working on for over a decade. If they didn't have such a dominant position buldozer would have faired much better over time and we would all have had multi threaded programs much sooner. Just Intel doing what intel does, if they cannot compete then they try to change the landscape woth their market share. Its exactly what they are doing with AVX512 right now. The sad part is if they hadn't slowed muti threading progress and had been developing multi core themselves i instead of sitting on their butts reselling the same chip reprocessed then they would more than likely still be in the lead. Its not like it wasn't inevitable anyway as there are diminishing returns trying to eak out performance from a single core.
Gotcha. Initially I thought you were referring to events like the p3 bug that Intel jerked around reviewers with before admitting fault as the press piled on. So the issue with what you said, and not what you bring up but what Intel is doing that AVX and AVX2 instructions cause energy use to rise while they're executing. AVX512 is considerable and most processors throttle by downclocking, correct? I'm not seeing what Intel is trying to achieve here. I know that AVX512 is fairly niche still and the costs to implement in software are high. Thanks for the info. Have to admit I did find Intel's unicorn 56 core glued processor funny. In large compute, it's 'cheaper' in the long run go to with NVidia et al. over an Intel processor simply because of the costs and the massive performance difference. Like most of Intel's doings, as you've wonderfully written out, they're late to market with Xe which seems a bit naff based on leaks.
Last edited by SwitchFX; 08-02-2020 at 04:52 PM.