3 ms·
Its not uncommon for GPU workloads in games to max out about 20% INT32 calculations, but alas its enough to drop the FP32 performance quite a bit. I suspect Nvi
by PaulKeeble 6y ago
Its not uncommon for GPU workloads in games to max out about 20% INT32 calculations, but alas its enough to drop the FP32 performance quite a bit. I suspect Nvidia next time will probably separate out the INT32 and 2x FP32 units and gradually move towards going towards a better ratio of hardware that better suits the usual workload split.
- _kbh_ 6y agoDue to the lower amount of INT32 in game loads as you stated, I don't think that separating INT32 and FP32 hardware makes a lot of sense, because you can share a substantial amount of the hardware between the two overall leading to space savings.
- peterhj 6y agoOn the contrary, "dark silicon" instead suggests that separating fp32 and int32 (now in GA102/104, fp32 and int32/fp32) data paths at the cost of more die space usage currently makes excellent sense. (See also: tensor cores, ray tracing cores.) Jensen Huang very briefly alluded to this when during the GA102/104 announcement he mentioned the end of Dennard scaling.
- _kbh_ 6y agoBut the GA102/GA104 doesn’t have seperate execution units for INT and FP32 because the INT also does FP32. So I don’t see how that shows that separating FP32 and INT hardware makes sense.