3 ms·
Simple + plausible explanation: approximately nobody uses fancy instructions with fancy addressing, so they butcher-chopped some verilog (does intel use verilog
by jjoonathan 6y ago
Simple + plausible explanation: approximately nobody uses fancy instructions with fancy addressing, so they butcher-chopped some verilog (does intel use verilog?) in one generation to meet a target and the chopped code outlived its original purpose.
Does OP really think legacy code dynamics don't apply to intel?
Wasn't there a bug not long ago where you could thermally kill a CPU by pulling clever tricks to get vector unit utilization higher than was supposed to be possible (presumably because nobody cared enough to precisely figure out "possible")?
- jeffbee 6y agoI don't know about "kill" but power viruses have been a research topic for a long time. A decade ago researchers were using automatic techniques for maximizing power consumption on real hardware (https://lca.ece.utexas.edu/pubs/ganesan_pact10.pdf https://lca.ece.utexas.edu/pubs/ganesan_pact10.pdf)
- userbinator 6y agoOdd to not see a mention of LINPACK in that paper, when it has reliably produced temperatures exceeding all other stress-testing programs I've tried, as well as uncovered instabilities that others couldn't find. It also turns out to be a very realistic type of benchmark (solving dense systems of linear equations). The paper doesn't predate its use, so I guess the authors just haven't spent much time on overclocking forums...