4 ms·
Personally, I think it’s valuable to take advantage of new features. AVX512 can be dozens of times faster than scalar operations, and clhash is the fastest stro
by stochastic_monk 8y ago
Personally, I think it’s valuable to take advantage of new features. AVX512 can be dozens of times faster than scalar operations, and clhash is the fastest strongly universal string hash library. There’s no good reason to pass on these kinds of performance improvements.
I know these aren’t the features in question, but casually dismissing the benefits of CPU improvements doesn’t strike me as productive.
- reacharavindh 8y agoTrue. But, not implementing all intel CPU features "right away" would not be such a bad idea. As a security conscious OS environment, they're wise to not implement certain features until there is a proven need for them/or until there is mature understanding of the features. I for one choose Debian or OpenBSD for such needs. I don't need my firewall appliance(pf + OpenBSD) to be in a hurry to implement AVX512 for example. I'd just pick one of many bleeding edge distributions for say a laptop.
- yjftsjthsd-h 8y agoI like performance. But. OpenBSD supports hardware versions a long way back. So you either break compatibility, ship more versions, or have to detect features on the fly, which works but has costs. On the other hand, if all x86_64 (amd64) supports a feature then it seems like a better bet.
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]
- hedora 8y agoFor performance sensitive deployments, I agree. On the other hand, I can’t remember the last time any non-interpreted system I deployed for my own use was too slow, even on low-wattage hardware / smallest available cloud instances. At some point, “rock solid” is more imporant than “N% faster”. As hardware gets faster, stability is the dominant consideration for a larger percentage of deployments.