3 ms·
I think the idea is that if you design the CPU not to downclock, you can make more balanced design choices (maybe better internal power distribution?) so that t
by quotemstr 7y ago
I think the idea is that if you design the CPU not to downclock, you can make more balanced design choices (maybe better internal power distribution?) so that the downclock ratio isn't quite as severe as it is on Intel chips even though you're incurring it all the time (because it's baked into the silicon and isn't an operating mode)
- tedunangst 7y agoWhat does balanced mean? IMO, balanced internal power distribution would be a system where you have a certain power budget, and whichever execution unit is active can scale up as fast as it can to use that power. A system where the clocks are fixed and the power usage varies widely sounds unbalanced in comparison.
- quotemstr 7y agoThe problem is that the downclocking affects more than just the AVX instructions being executed and can last long enough to impair overall system performance. If you could just make each AVX512 instruction take twice the cycles, you'd get the same throughout and energy use per unit real time but not impair the rest of the system. I know it's not really that simple --- but there must be a better way to avoid the AVX throttling problem than the one we've used so far.
- tedunangst 7y agoThe time it takes to switch power back and forth between units is problematic.