3 ms·
> And here's a great post about the justification for having so much special-purpose hardware: Ok but it doesn't actually justify why AMX & ANE both exist. It
by kllrnohj 4y ago
> And here's a great post about the justification for having so much special-purpose hardware:
Ok but it doesn't actually justify why AMX & ANE both exist. It makes kind of a vague handwavy "well AMX latency is better[1] and that's useful[2]"
1: but not measured, so not actually known, and with a note that it's been called out that the AMX understanding is incorrect, so is this point even still accurate?
2: but not elaborated on in the slightest or any comparison of test workloads
So why do both AMX & ANE exist? CPU team did AMX before the ANE team showed up with something bigger & better? Are they actually used for differing workloads or simultaneously?