3 ms·
> newer AVX-512 variants as opposed to older AVX2-only CPUs This is exactly my issue with targeting AVX-512. It isn't just absent on "older AVX2-only CPUs." It
by burntsushi 1y ago
> newer AVX-512 variants as opposed to older AVX2-only CPUs
This is exactly my issue with targeting AVX-512. It isn't just absent on "older AVX2-only CPUs." It's also absent on many "newer AVX2-only CPUs." For example, the i9-14900K. I don't think any of the other newer Intel CPUs have AVX-512 either. And historically, whether an x86-64 CPU supported AVX-512 at all was hit or miss.
AVX-512 has been around for a very long time now, and it has just never been consistently available.
- vlovich123 1y agoIt’s mainly available in data centers, but yes missing in consumer parts. And for a while even in data centers you wanted to be careful about using it due to Intel’s issues with clock downscaling but that hasn’t been true for a few years.
- ashvardanian 1y agoThe consumer situation is changing. A few years ago, when I was working with a team on some closed source HPC stuff, we’ve got everyone Tiger Lake-based laptops to simplify AVX-512 R&D. Now, Zen4-based desktop CPUs also support it. But its fair to say that I’m mostly focusing on the datacenter/supercomputing hardware, both on the x86 and Arm side.
- vlovich123 1y agoIf you’re targeting AVX-512 Intel consumer it’s pointless. But yes, AMD does continue to ship AVX-512 chips so completely ignoring 512 on consumer isn’t ideal.