Slashdot Mirror
AMD Alleges Intel Compilers Create Slower AMD Code
edxwelch writes "In AMD's recient anti-trust
lawsuit
AMD have examined the Intel compiler and found that it deliberatly runs code slower when it detects that the processor is an AMD.
"To achieve this, Intel designed the compiler to compile code
along several alternate code paths. ... By design, the
code paths were not created equally. If the program detects a "Genuine Intel" microprocessor,
it executes a fully optimized code path and operates with the maximum efficiency. However,
if the program detects an "Authentic AMD" microprocessor, it executes a different code path
that will degrade the program's performance or cause it to crash.""
That is an outragous claim! No company would stoop so low. Why, that would be like claiming that Microsoft configured its servers to give broken HTML to browsers other than Internet Explorer. That would be like saying that Apple gave away free MP3s that work in the Ipod but that crash other music players. That would be like saying that Adobe publishes pdfs that b0rk XPDF.
Anybody can see that this claim is ludicrous and that things like this just don't happen. (but I hope I'm not giving anybody any ideas.)
Type your currency conversion into a free form text box
if ($submission) {
$gotaco = "submit";
$spellcheck = "no";
$dupecheck = "definitelynot";
} else {
// I got nothing. *shrugs*
}
...broken floating-point units and shabby multiple execution contexts. This leads to less-than-ideal optimization on well-designed architectures. AMD was advised several years back that they would need to come up with some shittier designs if they wanted to take advantage of Intel's optimizations. Shame on AMD for not making a crappier CPU.
In version 1.0 of my software, I always throw in some loops that just count to a million to throw in some delays. That way you can include "optimization" as a deliverable for version 2.0.
profit!
Microsoft has alleged that the gcc compiler is deliberately designed so that programs compiled with it do not run as efficiently under Windows as they do under Linux.
Mods: Do you disagree with me? Go ahead and mod me down. Meta-mods will sort it out. Good luck!
...Microsoft alleges that Linux boxes emit gamma rays that keeps Windows boxes getting blue screens!
...Yahoo! alleges that Google Toolbar alters it's search results to include irrelevant pr0n pages!
...Cingular alleges that T-Mobile customer service reps prank call their support line during free time, resulting in shitty service!
(add your own...)
Mozilla stole tabs from NetCaptor. So what? Right?
Intel should get the death penalty.
if(chip == AMD)
Sleep(80);
I switched back to Visual C++.
And when a Microsoft product is the lesser of two evils, you know for sure that there's something fishy going on.
Is there some big counterfeit Processor ring I don't know about? What if the program detects a non-genuine Intel/AMD?
Is it just me, or do you hate it when people say "Is it just me..."?
I am huge AMD fan myself
Well, they do require quite a lot of cooling, don't they?
"A door is what a dog is perpetually on the wrong side of" - Ogden Nash
On that note, was there *anything* negative that came of the Microsoft monopoly ruling?
Well for starters, Microsoft is still here.
You forgot this code at the bottom:
push parent, @AMDsubpoena_list
Intel probably puts in serious bucks to R&D of their compilers so their chips look the fastest. This is logical; they'd want to do what they could do enhance speed regardless of if it was hardware or software doing the speedup.
But, the operative question is, who uses the Intel compiler anyway? If I was going to compile something, and I needed really fast results, I would probably use the compiler of the hardware manufacturer- be it Intel or AMD. I'm sure AMD has a compiler tuned to exploit every possible speedup you could ask for on an AMD chip.
Further, they'd be wise (if they don't do this already) to sell/give away technical manuals for compiler writers telling them how to squeeze every little bit of extra performance out.
Commercial compiler vendors include (my estimation, please reply with additions):
* Intel
* AMD
* GCC
* Microsoft
* Watcom (still in business?)
* Borland (still doing this?)
This obviously leaves out the computer science students worldwide. But, my point is, maybe this is a wake up call to anyone using an Intel compiler that they need to switch to one of the others above (GCC especially).
Unitarian Church: Freethinkers Congregate!
************ // I got nothing. *shrugs* // I got nothing. Well, except the millions I got paid by Andover. *lights cigar with burning stack of hundreds*
*** 5,7 ****
} else {
-
}
--- 5,7 ---
} else {
+
}
************
Another example of AMD trying to win in the marketplace through whining.
So that means I can cheat in business and whoever sues me is just a whining loser? Cool! Where do I sign up?
Something like this would never be implemented in an open source compiler. With open source, you know exactly what you get...
:)
If you mean GCC, then, yeah, I couldn't agree more with you. It's equally slow on EVERY processor
In particular, his correlation of the bursting of the
Verily, the kool-aid of Redmond: tasteth it not of milk and honey?
Get thee glass eyes, and, like a scurvy politician, seem to see things thou dost not.--King Lear
Vee vill lhet it pass zis time. Now move along, and don't let it happen again.
Dude, Ken Thompson wrote that compiler. That is the same thing as throwing hundreds of ordinary engineers at the problem.
The "cue the foo posts in 3, 2, 1..." posts will commence with no subsequent foo posts in 3, 2, 1...
Hello, did someone say "Vi clone in LISP?"Ya mean, like that?
WHOAH.
whoah whoah whoah whoah whoah.
Go take a walk and calm the fuck down.
This is a sleazy business tactic, nothing more.
It's been a long time.
I wonder how much of that cooler operation is due to the inefficient code? ;-)
Oh well, what the hell...