Author: Jeremiah Penery
Date: 13:07:37 09/30/02
Go up one level in this thread
On September 30, 2002 at 12:26:36, Eugene Nalimov wrote: >Wrong. Some P4 optimizations hurt AMD. Then I suppose they hurt P2/P3 just as much. Either way, my point is still valid, except for the psychotic cases where some optimization helps one and hurts the other (I'm sure there aren't a whole lot). >Thanks, >Eugene > >On September 30, 2002 at 00:09:28, Jeremiah Penery wrote: > >>On September 29, 2002 at 23:31:36, Robert Hyatt wrote: >> >>>I don't know what this means. I have several dozen programs (Crafty >>>is only one) that we have run using intel's compiler and gcc, and in >>>_every_ case, Intel's compiler is faster. On P2's, on P3's and on >>>P4's... Of course I wouldn't use intel's compiler for an AMD chip, >>>why would they want to optimize for a competitor's chip??? >> >>They don't have to optimize specifically for the competitor's chip, as Intel >>compiler still produces probably the fastest binaries for AMD machines. Any >>general optimizations (P2, P3, and even P4 optimizations (excluding SSE2 stuff >>or whatever)) are just as helpful for AMD processors as they are for Intel ones.
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.