13 ms·
They switched away from CORDIC at one point: https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/developer/articles/technical/the-difference-between-x87-instructions-and-m
by bigbillheck 3y ago
They switched away from CORDIC at one point: https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/developer/articles/technical/the-difference-between-x87-instructions-and-mathematical-functions.html?wapkw=fsin https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/developer/articles/t...
(there doesn't seem to actually be a linked article there, just the summary)
- vardump 3y agoPretty weird Intel's sine computation latency hasn't changed all that much over the years. Latencies have been pretty similar for 20 years. EDIT: That's a paper for a software library, not the CPU's internal implementation. Which is probably still done with CORDIC.
- bigbillheck 3y ago> EDIT: That's a paper for a software library, not the CPU's internal implementation. Unless you're seeing something I'm not, it's talking about x87, which hasn't been anything other than 'internal' since they stopped selling the 80486sx.
- vardump 3y agoAh you're right. Anyways I wonder why it's still so slow. 60-120 cycles sure looks like a CORDIC implementation, but perhaps not.