Mon, Jul 28, 2014, 1:10 AM EDT - U.S. Markets open in 8 hrs 20 mins

Recent

% | $
Click the to save as a favorite.

Intel Corporation Message Board

you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the posts
  • getanid61 getanid61 Dec 8, 2012 1:57 PM Flag

    Boston Viridis Servers

    Part of the AMD settlement was INtel compilers could no longer turn off the optimizations when it recognized an AMD CPU...

    SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Most Replied Expand all replies
    • Yes. True. Now Intel HAS to make the assumption that the silicon supports a feature the way the Intel CPU does if the feature bit is on.

      It is not about the compiler but more about the hand optimized runtime libraries that are shipped with the compiler. The issue is more complex than the simple minded thinking "Intel cheated" and "AMD had to go to court for a fair deal".

      Now, the Intel runtime library code checks the FEATURE bits and if set, assumes that the feature is properly supported on the silicon. If the bit is set, is an AMD CPU and it has a bug, there is no way to turn off the feature and no way to avoid running the program on the AMD CPU.

      Example.
      There are some subtle differences in the way AMD handles the AVX instructions. The GIMP math library built with GCC runs fine on Intel Sandy Bridge but fails intermittantly on the AMD Bulldozer parts when using AVX instructions. AMD users cannot correctly run the program and if the program was compiled with the Intel compiler could not check to see if it was on an AMD part.

      For some fun reading, google
      amd avx problems

 
INTC
34.250.00(0.00%)Jul 25 4:00 PMEDT

Trending Tickers

i
Trending Tickers features significant U.S. stocks showing the most dramatic increase in user interest in Yahoo Finance in the previous hour over historic norms. The list is limited to those equities which trade at least 100,000 shares on an average day and have a market cap of more than $300 million.