Author: Vincent Diepeveen
Date: 13:25:34 10/02/02
Go up one level in this thread
On October 02, 2002 at 16:20:39, Robert Hyatt wrote: >On October 02, 2002 at 15:13:32, Vincent Diepeveen wrote: > >>On October 01, 2002 at 22:43:58, Robert Hyatt wrote: >> >>>On October 01, 2002 at 09:43:00, Vincent Diepeveen wrote: >>> >>>>On September 30, 2002 at 12:13:44, Robert Hyatt wrote: >>>> >>>>>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. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>Maybe or maybe not. AMD's pipeline is different, and there are subtle >>>>>differences in instruction choices, that can make a difference in speed. I >>>>>don't see why the Intel compiler guys would bother studying AMD at all... >>>> >>>>I bet 50% of their time goes into studying what is faster for P4 than for K7 :) >>> >>> >>>I'd bet they don't. Optimizing for a specific processor family is tough. >>> >>>Trying to optimize for one while producing code that does worse on another >>>processor is a _real_ can of worms. I don't think anyone would waste that >>>kind of time. >> >>I am very sure they will. We talk about billions being at stake here. >>It is completely naive to suppose they do not study the K7. > > >What does it feel like to be "the world's foremost authority on everything?" > >I am sure Intel has studied AMD chips. I am also sure that the _compiler_ >guys are _not_ paying any attention to it, because there is no point to doing >so. Have you written a compiler? I have. Have you written an optimizer? I >have. Do you know what you are talking about here? I do. > >Don't make things up. Get real answers. Just like the quad 1.6ghz machines >that >you claim do not exist but which dell is shipping. > >I explained that to you a couple of weeks ago. I can't find that quad 2.2 I saw >the >output from, as that is what I was looking for. But I found several quads in >the 1.4-1.6 >range. > > > >> It is very >>good deal to pay a few guys fulltime in order to sell for a couple of >>billions more. Because if YOUR compiler, which without question >>is doing great at specint tests, is going to let their processor look >>better then you sell a couple of billions less. > >Again, the compiler guys are more interested in making code run faster on their >processor. Not in making it run _slower_ on an AMD processor. Nothing forces >_anybody_ to use the intel compiler to produce SPEC numbers. If their compiler >is >worse than MSVC then everyone would use MSVC. Intel would have wasted hundreds >of thousands of dollars on the compiler development, and gotten _nothing_ from >it. In >reality, they just try to make the code run as fast as possible on their chips >and to heck >with everyone else... > > > > > >> >>Do you want to take the risk of a couple of billions? >> >>Say 50 billion dollar? > > > >make up whatever number you want. It doesn't change the basic facts I gave you >above. Wave your hands all you want, if it makes you feel better, although it >won't >make your ramblings true. Don't make idiot statements here. Lesson 1 in economy is: - what is a company? answer: an institute that tries to make money Now question to you is: do you want to make money or not? answer: yes Hardest way to do it answer: improving your processor Hard but way easier way to do it answer: improve compiler such that you get faster but not competition Of course the answer is not: "improve your compiler such that possibly competition profits even more from your compiler than you do".
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.