4 ms·

Maybe I was mixing up names in my head, but I remember from 5~10 years back an Open[Something] (thought it was OpenCL) that in theory could transparently handle

Maybe I was mixing up names in my head, but I remember from 5~10 years back an Open[Something] (thought it was OpenCL) that in theory could transparently handle multithreaded code across single/dual/quad[0] core or GPGPU (either nvidia or AMD). This is what I had in mind when I wrote "if Intel had given it good OpenCL support". Again, maybe I'm mixing things up in my head since my career never took me down that lane to write massively paralell code (though I am a user of it, indirectly, through deep learning frameworks). [0] back then this was as big a CPU would get

dragontamer 6y ago
There's a version of OpenCL that compiled to Intel, but I'm not very familiar with it. I remember reading things like: https://software.intel.com/content/www/us/en/develop/documentation/iocl-tec-opg/top/coding-for-the-intel-architecture-processors/using-vector-data-types.html https://software.intel.com/content/www/us/en/develop/documen... Where you'd have to use float8 types to be assured of SIMD-benefits on CPU code. As such, its probably more useful to rely upon auto-vectorizers in C++ code (such as #pragma omp simd) and maybe intrinsics for the complicated cases. Intel does seem to have some level of OpenCL -> AVX tech: http://llvm.org/devmtg/2011-11/Rotem_IntelOpenCLSDKVectorizer.pdf http://llvm.org/devmtg/2011-11/Rotem_IntelOpenCLSDKVectorize...