[Beowulf] newbie
Many of your questions may have already been answered in earlier discussions or in the FAQ. The search results page will indicate current discussions as well as past list serves, articles, and papers.
Greg Lindahl lindahl at pbm.comSat May 2 16:42:15 PDT 2009
- Previous message: [Beowulf] newbie
- Next message: [Beowulf] newbie
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
> [Intel and Shanghai] > > Is this deliberate? > > In the sense that they have no desire to support > competitors hardware, yes. Not really surprising, > if AMD made compilers I doubt they'd try and do > Intel specific optimisations either.. Actually, that's what a part of the AMD/Intel anti-trust lawsuit is about. Back in the day of plug-compatible mainframes, IBM would have been in deep anti-trust doodoo for intentionally reducing performance on competing hardware -- and their mainframe architecture, just like x86, had a wide variety of add-on features which could be tested for individually, just like SSE / SSE2 / SSE3 / etc. Instead of making compilers, AMD chose to suport PathScale (now SiCortex), PGI, and gcc, all of which also have Intel-specific optimizations. As for the blog posting, you shouldn't draw general conclusions from a single toy test-case. And I think you'll find all compilers will do a much better job if they know at compile-time that it's x**(-2)... so if that's your real app, don't code it like that toy. -- greg
- Previous message: [Beowulf] newbie
- Next message: [Beowulf] newbie
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the Beowulf mailing list
