El lun., 12 nov. 2018 a las 9:44, Liam Proven (
On 12/11/2018 13:19, Aleksa Sarai wrote:
(I think you'd need to do gcc -march=native or use very new Intel-specific intrinsics).
Beware -- much of that sort of thing and you'll start wanting to switch to Gentoo. ;-)
https://funroll-loops.teurasporsaat.org/
And please remember that AMD's CPU business wasn't doing too well until little over a year ago -- and recently did they become very competitive with (and in some cases superior to) Intel. Mentioning AMD CPU support in 2016 wouldn't have made much sense or been impressive. (We aren't well-known for updating the wiki in a timely manner. :P)
That's not really fair.
It's not just Intel and AMD and almost never was. Since the IBM PC came out, x86 chips have come from: * Intel * NEC * AMD * Harris * Cyrix * IDT * Via * Transmeta ... and that's from memory.
Around the Pentium 1 period, the best bang-for-the-buck was Cyrix. Even IBM manufactured and used them. The Cyrix 6x86 was about 15-20% faster, clock for clock, than Intel.
Quake killed it.
https://liam-on-linux.livejournal.com/49259.html
Then around the Pentium 4 period, the best performance for both money and for electricity consumption was AMD:
https://www.pcper.com/news/Editorial/Yes-Netburst-really-was-bad-CPU-archite...
Intel had to do a humiliating climb-down, cancel the entire P4 line and switch to a derivative of the Pentium-M instead:
https://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/05/13/intel_confirms_netburst_end/
The Pentium-M being a derivative of the old Pentium 3, i.e. of the Pentium Pro from 1995.
You forgot The Pentium was based on patents stolen to Digital from the Alpha risc processor http://archive.fortune.com/magazines/fortune/fortune_archive/1997/06/09/2275...
So basically for at 3 periods during the time while x86 has been dominant -- NEC V20/V30 versus 8088/8086, 1982-1984; Cyrix 6x86 versus P5, 1996-1997; and AMD Sledgehammer versus Netburst P4, 2003 to 2006 -- Intel has *not* been the vendor of the fastest x86 processors.
Yes, it's Intel's architecture. Yes, Intel has always been the dominant vendor. But it's not had it all its own way.
Yes, dominant with monopolic and mafia tactics, but no "because is the best"! Other time when AMD launched the X86-64 Opterons, and dominated the server market: http://www.novell.com/news/press/archive/2003/suse_archive/cray.html In November 12, 2009 Intel and AMD settle, agree cross-licensing deal, on which Intel has payed AMD $1.25bn and the two companies will share patent rights for the next five years, while AMD has cancelled all antitrust litigation against Intel https://www.zdnet.com/article/intel-and-amd-settle-agree-cross-licensing-dea... https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/2488/000119312509236705/dex102.htm A year ago according to a report by Fundzilla, Intel has reached a deal to license AMD’s graphics technology, though neither of the two companies have acknowledged or refuted the news. During the last year, there has been a lot of speculation that Intel was contemplating switching over to AMD graphics when its cross-licensing deal with Nvidia ends in March 2017 https://www.forbes.com/sites/greatspeculations/2017/05/17/licensing-deal-wit... When I say "the intel microprocessors are buggy and insecure", I refer to this: https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2018/01/intel-ceos-sale-of-st... https://www.forbes.com/sites/thomasbrewster/2018/01/10/intel-microsoft-linux... https://thehackernews.com/2018/07/intel-spectre-vulnerability.html https://thehackernews.com/2018/07/netspectre-remote-spectre-attack.html https://www.securitynow.com/author.asp?section_id=649&doc_id=745487 And the latest security bug: https://thehackernews.com/2018/11/portsmash-intel-vulnerability.html -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org