> On Wed, 16 Jun 2021 13:15:40 -0400, you wrote:
>
>>The answer given, and I'm
>>not making this up, is that AMD listens to their users and gives the
>>users what they want, and right now they're not hearing any demand for
>>AVX512.
>>
>>Personally, I call BS on that one. I can't imagine anyone
Thanks for the input. I have looked at that Wikipedia page before, but
never checked it that closely. I just looked mainly to see what
processors supported what extensions. After taking a closer look at
AVX-512, and all the different subdivisions, I see exactly what you're
saying. It's a mess!
Hi all,
This is, in my humble opinion, also the big problem CPUs are facing. They
> are
> build to tackle all possible scenarios, from simple integer to floating
> point,
> from in-memory to disc I/O. In some respect it would have been better to
> stick
> with a separate math unit which then
Dear all
> System architecture has been a problem ... making a processing unit
> 10-100x as fast as its support components means you have to code with
> that in mind. A simple `gfortran -O3 mycode.f` won't necessarily
> generate optimal code for the system ( but I swear ... -O3 ... it says
> it
AVX-512 is SIMD and in that respect compiled Intel routines will run almost
automatically on Intel processors.
It's not like I was answering the question. I realize or under realize the
implementation problems. You need to do a side by side comparison of the
die.
On Mon, Jun 21, 2021, 7:47 AM
On Mon, Jun 21, 2021 at 09:46:30AM -0400, Joe Landman wrote:
> On 6/21/21 9:20 AM, Jonathan Engwall wrote:
> > I have followed this thinking "square peg, round hole."
> > You have got it again, Joe. Compilers are your problem.
>
>
> Erp ... did I mess up again?
>
> Here's where awesome compiler
On 6/21/21 9:20 AM, Jonathan Engwall wrote:
I have followed this thinking "square peg, round hole."
You have got it again, Joe. Compilers are your problem.
Erp ... did I mess up again?
System architecture has been a problem ... making a processing unit
10-100x as fast as its support
I have followed this thinking "square peg, round hole."
You have got it again, Joe. Compilers are your problem.
On Sun, Jun 20, 2021, 10:21 AM Joe Landman wrote:
> (Note: not disagreeing at all with Gerald, actually agreeing strongly ...
> also, correct address this time! Thanks Gerald!)
>
>
