By: David Kanter (dkanter.delete@this.realworldtech.com), February 18, 2011 12:52 pm
Room: Moderated Discussions
Nicolas Capens (nicolas.capens@gmail.com) on 2/17/11 wrote:
---------------------------
>Hi David,
>
>David Kanter (dkanter@realworldtech.com) on 2/15/11 wrote:
>---------------------------
>>You don't understand anything I write, so I'm done discussing this with you.
>
>What exactly didn't I understand? That a high-end discrete GPU with almost three
>times more transistors having nearly an order of magnitude higher bandwidth over
>a CPU+IGP, really is relevant to the viability of having a >homogenous CPU take over the role of said IGP?
No, you don't understand circuit design or any of the fundamental trade-offs that come into play when designing hardware (let alone the economics of selling such hardware).
Not only that, but you consistently refuse to face reality and consider HARD metrics and data that is contrary to your beliefs.
>Don't be ridiculous. You're done discussing because you >ran out of arguments. You
>failed to look at the bigger picture and take the (triple) >convergence into account,
>and you failed to take the benefits of unification into >account (*).
You're certainly welcome to your near religious beliefs.
>And that's forgivable. The current gap between the CPU and IGP can easily lead
>one to disregard progress and believe CPUs can never adequately handle graphics.
>But I expected you would at least have the decency to admit I might have a few valid
>points about how that current situation will change in >favor of software rendering,
>instead of saying I don't understand anything you write.
I told you exactly when that would happen. When the % of CPU cycles required to do mainstream rendering* is <5% of the CPU cycles. That's what it took for us to get rid of sound hardware.
>That would be pretty terrible in and by itself. You're an >analyst so you're supposed
>to explain things in a way people can easily understand >it. So either you failed
>to make an engineer understand "anything" you wrote, or >some of the things you wrote are false or irrelevant.
Unfortunately, when you are faced with someone who:
1. Doesn't understand key relevant concepts
2. Refuses to learn
3. Cannot agree on basic and widely accepted metrics for comparing different approaches
4. Constantly pushes for hypothetical scenarios with no data or evidence
There's really not a lot to be done. I can't debate someone over beliefs that take on the nature of religious fervor and blind faith.
>So I kindly suggest you do take another look at my previous response, and either
>show how I misunderstood that big differences at the hardware level equally affect
>software rendering efficiency of future CPUs, or start putting some doubt into your
>premature conclusions. I believe we settled on using Crysis as a benchmark for effective
>throughput, so don't give me theoretical data unless you also prove that it's significantly
>relevant to the viability of a homogenous CPU doing >graphics.
I already explained, at length, repeatedly. Others have explained as well.
For instance, we all asked how many gate delays, power and area would the hypothetical gather/scatter cost to implement. How would it impact single threaded code (e.g. SPECint). I have yet to hear anything.
Moreover, you make utterly unsubstantiated (and simply wrong) claims about the applicability of gather/scatter to ordinary code and claims about performance implications for SW rendering WITHOUT any substantiation. How do you know that single cycle scatter/gather is achievable? You don't even know the number of gate delays required.
Trying to even examine this notion in detail was not possible and met with obfuscation on your part.
>Note that you'll have to look further ahead than you're used to. Instead of merely
>analyzing next generation hardware,
I look out much further than that.
>you'll have to look at long-lasting trends like
>compute density convergence, unification of programmable logic, and increasing application
>complexity. So far you've done none of that. I've proven that both the bandwidth
>and theoretical throughput of future CPUs suffices to make >the IGP redundant. It's
>your turn to prove that despite that it's never going to >work.
I never said it would never work. In fact, I clearly told you the necessary (but not sufficient) conditions. It's possible that within 10-15 years it might be reasonable, it's not likely within 5.
Moreover, the data you provided was simply WRONG and BAD and DISCREDITED by the author of the simulator you used. Merely presenting spurious data isn't helpful to the conversation.
>I could settle on agreeing to disagree, and just looking >at what the future brings,
>but I won't accept that you imply I don't understand >anything tout court.
Then demonstrate otherwise.
>(*) P.S.: Just in case you still don't see it, the benefit >of unification is that
>a homogenous CPU does not need to have the same compute >density as the IGP, to exceed
>its effective performance. You basically get area for >free, which would have otherwise
>remained largely idle (and you can trade it for power).
How do you know it would have remained idle? I agree it would be nice to have a unified architecture, but I think the reality is that processing in general is going to trend towards two distinct resources: latency optimized and throughput optimized, driven by the fundamental power and area efficiencies for separating the two.
Scatter/gather is necessary for large scale throughput processing (e.g. 16-wide vectors) and certainly beneficial for what I'd call a "GPU". However, it is largely anti-antithetical to the design principles of a CPU. If you look at how CPUs are designed, one of the most critical metrics is the absolute time of the three most common dependent operation pairs:
1. int-int
2. load-load
3. load-int
4. int-load (if your addressing is not sufficiently robust)
Everyone who designs CPUs for AMD, IBM, Intel, etc. is very open about the premier importance of this loop in hardware, yet you are openly dismissive. What other conclusion can I arrive at?
The problem with scatter/gather is that the hardware is large, slow and power hungry. Putting it in your critical path for a CPU is a bad idea. So to recap:
1. I am skeptical that mainstream graphics is likely to be <5% of cycles in the near future on a SW renderer. Your data is not even remotely convincing.
2. I am skeptical that the power and area efficiency of throughput and latency processors will narrow to the point where it only makes sense to have one (over the next 5 years). It is much more logical to first tightly integrate them (which has only just started to happen with SNB, and that's not a great representative of throughput processors).
2a. I also don't believe you understand the quantitative differences between throughput and latency processors (or the power and area implications thereof).
2b. We haven't even begun to discuss the outer layers of the memory hierarchy yet on latency vs. throughput.
3. I am skeptical that scatter/gather can be implemented in a CPU pipeline without causing significant problems.
4. The distinction between latency and throughput is far greater than scatter/gather alone, although that is one aspect.
The list goes on, but I have finite time.
David
---------------------------
>Hi David,
>
>David Kanter (dkanter@realworldtech.com) on 2/15/11 wrote:
>---------------------------
>>You don't understand anything I write, so I'm done discussing this with you.
>
>What exactly didn't I understand? That a high-end discrete GPU with almost three
>times more transistors having nearly an order of magnitude higher bandwidth over
>a CPU+IGP, really is relevant to the viability of having a >homogenous CPU take over the role of said IGP?
No, you don't understand circuit design or any of the fundamental trade-offs that come into play when designing hardware (let alone the economics of selling such hardware).
Not only that, but you consistently refuse to face reality and consider HARD metrics and data that is contrary to your beliefs.
>Don't be ridiculous. You're done discussing because you >ran out of arguments. You
>failed to look at the bigger picture and take the (triple) >convergence into account,
>and you failed to take the benefits of unification into >account (*).
You're certainly welcome to your near religious beliefs.
>And that's forgivable. The current gap between the CPU and IGP can easily lead
>one to disregard progress and believe CPUs can never adequately handle graphics.
>But I expected you would at least have the decency to admit I might have a few valid
>points about how that current situation will change in >favor of software rendering,
>instead of saying I don't understand anything you write.
I told you exactly when that would happen. When the % of CPU cycles required to do mainstream rendering* is <5% of the CPU cycles. That's what it took for us to get rid of sound hardware.
>That would be pretty terrible in and by itself. You're an >analyst so you're supposed
>to explain things in a way people can easily understand >it. So either you failed
>to make an engineer understand "anything" you wrote, or >some of the things you wrote are false or irrelevant.
Unfortunately, when you are faced with someone who:
1. Doesn't understand key relevant concepts
2. Refuses to learn
3. Cannot agree on basic and widely accepted metrics for comparing different approaches
4. Constantly pushes for hypothetical scenarios with no data or evidence
There's really not a lot to be done. I can't debate someone over beliefs that take on the nature of religious fervor and blind faith.
>So I kindly suggest you do take another look at my previous response, and either
>show how I misunderstood that big differences at the hardware level equally affect
>software rendering efficiency of future CPUs, or start putting some doubt into your
>premature conclusions. I believe we settled on using Crysis as a benchmark for effective
>throughput, so don't give me theoretical data unless you also prove that it's significantly
>relevant to the viability of a homogenous CPU doing >graphics.
I already explained, at length, repeatedly. Others have explained as well.
For instance, we all asked how many gate delays, power and area would the hypothetical gather/scatter cost to implement. How would it impact single threaded code (e.g. SPECint). I have yet to hear anything.
Moreover, you make utterly unsubstantiated (and simply wrong) claims about the applicability of gather/scatter to ordinary code and claims about performance implications for SW rendering WITHOUT any substantiation. How do you know that single cycle scatter/gather is achievable? You don't even know the number of gate delays required.
Trying to even examine this notion in detail was not possible and met with obfuscation on your part.
>Note that you'll have to look further ahead than you're used to. Instead of merely
>analyzing next generation hardware,
I look out much further than that.
>you'll have to look at long-lasting trends like
>compute density convergence, unification of programmable logic, and increasing application
>complexity. So far you've done none of that. I've proven that both the bandwidth
>and theoretical throughput of future CPUs suffices to make >the IGP redundant. It's
>your turn to prove that despite that it's never going to >work.
I never said it would never work. In fact, I clearly told you the necessary (but not sufficient) conditions. It's possible that within 10-15 years it might be reasonable, it's not likely within 5.
Moreover, the data you provided was simply WRONG and BAD and DISCREDITED by the author of the simulator you used. Merely presenting spurious data isn't helpful to the conversation.
>I could settle on agreeing to disagree, and just looking >at what the future brings,
>but I won't accept that you imply I don't understand >anything tout court.
Then demonstrate otherwise.
>(*) P.S.: Just in case you still don't see it, the benefit >of unification is that
>a homogenous CPU does not need to have the same compute >density as the IGP, to exceed
>its effective performance. You basically get area for >free, which would have otherwise
>remained largely idle (and you can trade it for power).
How do you know it would have remained idle? I agree it would be nice to have a unified architecture, but I think the reality is that processing in general is going to trend towards two distinct resources: latency optimized and throughput optimized, driven by the fundamental power and area efficiencies for separating the two.
Scatter/gather is necessary for large scale throughput processing (e.g. 16-wide vectors) and certainly beneficial for what I'd call a "GPU". However, it is largely anti-antithetical to the design principles of a CPU. If you look at how CPUs are designed, one of the most critical metrics is the absolute time of the three most common dependent operation pairs:
1. int-int
2. load-load
3. load-int
4. int-load (if your addressing is not sufficiently robust)
Everyone who designs CPUs for AMD, IBM, Intel, etc. is very open about the premier importance of this loop in hardware, yet you are openly dismissive. What other conclusion can I arrive at?
The problem with scatter/gather is that the hardware is large, slow and power hungry. Putting it in your critical path for a CPU is a bad idea. So to recap:
1. I am skeptical that mainstream graphics is likely to be <5% of cycles in the near future on a SW renderer. Your data is not even remotely convincing.
2. I am skeptical that the power and area efficiency of throughput and latency processors will narrow to the point where it only makes sense to have one (over the next 5 years). It is much more logical to first tightly integrate them (which has only just started to happen with SNB, and that's not a great representative of throughput processors).
2a. I also don't believe you understand the quantitative differences between throughput and latency processors (or the power and area implications thereof).
2b. We haven't even begun to discuss the outer layers of the memory hierarchy yet on latency vs. throughput.
3. I am skeptical that scatter/gather can be implemented in a CPU pipeline without causing significant problems.
4. The distinction between latency and throughput is far greater than scatter/gather alone, although that is one aspect.
The list goes on, but I have finite time.
David
Topic | Posted By | Date |
---|---|---|
Sandy Bridge CPU article online | David Kanter | 2010/09/26 09:35 PM |
Sandy Bridge CPU article online | Alex | 2010/09/27 05:22 AM |
Sandy Bridge CPU article online | David Kanter | 2010/09/27 10:06 AM |
Sandy Bridge CPU article online | someone | 2010/09/27 06:03 AM |
Sandy Bridge CPU article online | slacker | 2010/09/27 02:08 PM |
PowerPC is now Power | Paul A. Clayton | 2010/09/27 04:34 PM |
Sandy Bridge CPU article online | Dave | 2010/11/10 10:15 PM |
Sandy Bridge CPU article online | someone | 2010/09/27 06:23 AM |
Sandy Bridge CPU article online | David Kanter | 2010/09/27 06:39 PM |
Optimizing register clear | Paul A. Clayton | 2010/09/28 12:34 PM |
Sandy Bridge CPU article online | MS | 2010/09/27 06:54 AM |
Sandy Bridge CPU article online | David Kanter | 2010/09/27 10:15 AM |
Sandy Bridge CPU article online | MS | 2010/09/27 11:02 AM |
Sandy Bridge CPU article online | mpx | 2010/09/27 11:44 AM |
Sandy Bridge CPU article online | MS | 2010/09/27 02:37 PM |
Precisely | David Kanter | 2010/09/27 03:22 PM |
Sandy Bridge CPU article online | Richard Cownie | 2010/09/27 08:27 AM |
Sandy Bridge CPU article online | David Kanter | 2010/09/27 10:01 AM |
Sandy Bridge CPU article online | Richard Cownie | 2010/09/27 10:40 AM |
Sandy Bridge CPU article online | boots | 2010/09/27 11:19 AM |
Right, mid-2011, not 2010. Sorry (NT) | Richard Cownie | 2010/09/27 11:42 AM |
bulldozer single thread performance | Max | 2010/09/27 12:57 PM |
bulldozer single thread performance | Matt Waldhauer | 2011/03/02 11:32 AM |
Sandy Bridge CPU article online | Pun Zu | 2010/09/27 11:32 AM |
Sandy Bridge CPU article online | ? | 2010/09/27 11:44 AM |
Sandy Bridge CPU article online | David Kanter | 2010/09/27 01:11 PM |
My opinion is that anything that would take advantage of 256-bit AVX | redpriest | 2010/09/27 01:17 PM |
My opinion is that anything that would take advantage of 256-bit AVX | Aaron Spink | 2010/09/27 03:09 PM |
My opinion is that anything that would take advantage of 256-bit AVX | redpriest | 2010/09/27 04:06 PM |
My opinion is that anything that would take advantage of 256-bit AVX | David Kanter | 2010/09/27 05:23 PM |
My opinion is that anything that would take advantage of 256-bit AVX | Ian Ollmann | 2010/09/28 03:57 PM |
My opinion is that anything that would take advantage of 256-bit AVX | Ian Ollmann | 2010/09/28 04:35 PM |
My opinion is that anything that would take advantage of 256-bit AVX | Matt Waldhauer | 2010/09/28 10:58 PM |
My opinion is that anything that would take advantage of 256-bit AVX | Aaron Spink | 2010/09/27 06:39 PM |
My opinion is that anything that would take advantage of 256-bit AVX | Ian Ollmann | 2010/09/28 04:14 PM |
My opinion is that anything that would take advantage of 256-bit AVX | Megol | 2010/09/28 02:17 AM |
My opinion is that anything that would take advantage of 256-bit AVX | Michael S | 2010/09/28 05:47 AM |
PGI | Carlie Coats | 2010/09/28 10:23 AM |
gfortran... | Carlie Coats | 2010/09/29 09:33 AM |
My opinion is that anything that would take advantage of 256-bit AVX | mpx | 2010/09/28 12:58 PM |
My opinion is that anything that would take advantage of 256-bit AVX | Michael S | 2010/09/28 01:36 PM |
My opinion is that anything that would take advantage of 256-bit AVX | Foo_ | 2010/09/29 01:08 AM |
My opinion is that anything that would take advantage of 256-bit AVX | mpx | 2010/09/28 11:37 AM |
My opinion is that anything that would take advantage of 256-bit AVX | Aaron Spink | 2010/09/28 01:19 PM |
My opinion is that anything that would take advantage of 256-bit AVX | hobold | 2010/09/28 03:08 PM |
My opinion is that anything that would take advantage of 256-bit AVX | Ian Ollmann | 2010/09/28 04:26 PM |
My opinion is that anything that would take advantage of 256-bit AVX | Anthony | 2010/09/28 10:31 PM |
Sandy Bridge CPU article online | Hans de Vries | 2010/09/27 02:19 PM |
Sandy Bridge CPU article online | David Kanter | 2010/09/27 03:19 PM |
Sandy Bridge CPU article online | -Sweeper_ | 2010/09/27 05:50 PM |
Sandy Bridge CPU article online | David Kanter | 2010/09/27 06:41 PM |
Sandy Bridge CPU article online | Michael S | 2010/09/27 02:55 PM |
Sandy Bridge CPU article online | line98 | 2010/09/27 03:05 PM |
Sandy Bridge CPU article online | David Kanter | 2010/09/27 03:20 PM |
Sandy Bridge CPU article online | Michael S | 2010/09/27 03:23 PM |
Sandy Bridge CPU article online | line98 | 2010/09/27 03:42 PM |
Sandy Bridge CPU article online | David Kanter | 2010/09/27 09:33 PM |
Sandy Bridge CPU article online | Royi | 2010/09/27 04:04 PM |
Sandy Bridge CPU article online | Jack | 2010/09/27 04:40 PM |
Sandy Bridge CPU article online | Royi | 2010/09/27 11:47 PM |
Sandy Bridge CPU article online | David Kanter | 2010/09/27 11:54 PM |
Sandy Bridge CPU article online | Royi | 2010/09/27 11:59 PM |
Sandy Bridge CPU article online | JS | 2010/09/28 01:18 AM |
Sandy Bridge CPU article online | Royi | 2010/09/28 01:31 AM |
Sandy Bridge CPU article online | Jack | 2010/09/28 06:34 AM |
Sandy Bridge CPU article online | Royi | 2010/09/28 08:22 AM |
Sandy Bridge CPU article online | Foo_ | 2010/09/28 12:53 PM |
Sandy Bridge CPU article online | Paul | 2010/09/28 01:17 PM |
Sandy Bridge CPU article online | mpx | 2010/09/28 01:22 PM |
Sandy Bridge CPU article online | anonymous | 2010/09/28 02:06 PM |
Sandy Bridge CPU article online | IntelUser2000 | 2010/09/29 01:49 AM |
Sandy Bridge CPU article online | Jack | 2010/09/28 05:08 PM |
Sandy Bridge CPU article online | mpx | 2010/09/29 01:50 AM |
Sandy Bridge CPU article online | Linus Torvalds | 2010/09/29 12:01 PM |
Sandy Bridge CPU article online | Royi | 2010/09/29 12:48 PM |
Sandy Bridge CPU article online | mpx | 2010/09/29 02:15 PM |
Sandy Bridge CPU article online | Linus Torvalds | 2010/09/29 02:27 PM |
Sandy Bridge CPU article online | ? | 2010/09/29 11:18 PM |
Sandy Bridge CPU article online | savantu | 2010/09/30 12:28 AM |
Sandy Bridge CPU article online | ? | 2010/09/30 03:43 AM |
Sandy Bridge CPU article online | gallier2 | 2010/09/30 04:18 AM |
Sandy Bridge CPU article online | ? | 2010/09/30 08:38 AM |
Sandy Bridge CPU article online | David Hess | 2010/09/30 10:28 AM |
moderation (again) | hobold | 2010/10/01 05:08 AM |
Sandy Bridge CPU article online | Megol | 2010/09/30 02:13 AM |
Sandy Bridge CPU article online | ? | 2010/09/30 03:47 AM |
Sandy Bridge CPU article online | Ian Ameline | 2010/09/30 08:54 AM |
Sandy Bridge CPU article online | Linus Torvalds | 2010/09/30 10:18 AM |
Sandy Bridge CPU article online | Ian Ameline | 2010/09/30 12:04 PM |
Sandy Bridge CPU article online | Linus Torvalds | 2010/09/30 12:38 PM |
Sandy Bridge CPU article online | Michael S | 2010/09/30 01:02 PM |
Sandy Bridge CPU article online | NEON cortex | 2010/11/17 08:09 PM |
Sandy Bridge CPU article online | mpx | 2010/09/30 12:40 PM |
Sandy Bridge CPU article online | Linus Torvalds | 2010/09/30 01:00 PM |
Sandy Bridge CPU article online | NEON cortex | 2010/11/17 08:44 PM |
Sandy Bridge CPU article online | David Hess | 2010/09/30 10:36 AM |
Sandy Bridge CPU article online | someone | 2010/09/30 11:23 AM |
Sandy Bridge CPU article online | mpx | 2010/09/30 01:50 PM |
wii lesson | Michael S | 2010/09/30 02:12 PM |
wii lesson | Dan Downs | 2010/09/30 03:33 PM |
wii lesson | Kevin G | 2010/10/01 12:27 AM |
wii lesson | Rohit | 2010/10/01 07:53 AM |
wii lesson | Kevin G | 2010/10/02 03:30 AM |
wii lesson | mpx | 2010/10/01 09:02 AM |
wii lesson | IntelUser2000 | 2010/10/01 09:31 AM |
GPUs and games | David Kanter | 2010/09/30 08:17 PM |
GPUs and games | hobold | 2010/10/01 05:27 AM |
GPUs and games | anonymous | 2010/10/01 06:35 AM |
GPUs and games | Gabriele Svelto | 2010/10/01 09:07 AM |
GPUs and games | Linus Torvalds | 2010/10/01 10:41 AM |
GPUs and games | Anon | 2010/10/01 11:23 AM |
Can Intel do *this* ??? | Mark Roulo | 2010/10/03 03:17 PM |
Can Intel do *this* ??? | Anon | 2010/10/03 03:29 PM |
Can Intel do *this* ??? | Mark Roulo | 2010/10/03 03:55 PM |
Can Intel do *this* ??? | Anon | 2010/10/03 05:45 PM |
Can Intel do *this* ??? | Ian Ameline | 2010/10/03 10:35 PM |
Graphics, IGPs, and Cache | Joe | 2010/10/10 09:51 AM |
Graphics, IGPs, and Cache | Anon | 2010/10/10 10:18 PM |
Graphics, IGPs, and Cache | Rohit | 2010/10/11 06:14 AM |
Graphics, IGPs, and Cache | hobold | 2010/10/11 06:43 AM |
Maybe the IGPU doesn't load into the L3 | Mark Roulo | 2010/10/11 08:05 AM |
Graphics, IGPs, and Cache | David Kanter | 2010/10/11 09:01 AM |
Can Intel do *this* ??? | Gabriele Svelto | 2010/10/04 12:31 AM |
Kanter's Law. | Ian Ameline | 2010/10/01 02:05 PM |
Kanter's Law. | David Kanter | 2010/10/01 02:18 PM |
Kanter's Law. | Ian Ameline | 2010/10/01 02:33 PM |
Kanter's Law. | Kevin G | 2010/10/01 04:19 PM |
Kanter's Law. | IntelUser2000 | 2010/10/01 10:36 PM |
Kanter's Law. | Kevin G | 2010/10/02 03:15 AM |
Kanter's Law. | IntelUser2000 | 2010/10/02 02:35 PM |
Wii vs pc's | Rohit | 2010/10/01 07:34 PM |
Wii vs pc's | Gabriele Svelto | 2010/10/01 11:54 PM |
GPUs and games | mpx | 2010/10/02 11:30 AM |
GPUs and games | Foo_ | 2010/10/02 04:03 PM |
GPUs and games | mpx | 2010/10/03 11:29 AM |
GPUs and games | Foo_ | 2010/10/03 01:52 PM |
GPUs and games | mpx | 2010/10/03 03:29 PM |
GPUs and games | Anon | 2010/10/03 03:49 PM |
GPUs and games | mpx | 2010/10/04 11:42 AM |
GPUs and games | MS | 2010/10/04 02:51 PM |
GPUs and games | Anon | 2010/10/04 08:29 PM |
persistence of vision | hobold | 2010/10/04 11:47 PM |
GPUs and games | mpx | 2010/10/05 12:51 AM |
GPUs and games | MS | 2010/10/05 06:49 AM |
GPUs and games | Jack | 2010/10/05 11:17 AM |
GPUs and games | MS | 2010/10/05 05:19 PM |
GPUs and games | Jack | 2010/10/05 11:11 AM |
GPUs and games | mpx | 2010/10/05 12:51 PM |
GPUs and games | David Kanter | 2010/10/06 09:04 AM |
GPUs and games | jack | 2010/10/06 09:34 PM |
GPUs and games | Linus Torvalds | 2010/10/05 07:29 AM |
GPUs and games | Foo_ | 2010/10/04 04:49 AM |
GPUs and games | Jeremiah | 2010/10/08 10:58 AM |
GPUs and games | MS | 2010/10/08 01:37 PM |
GPUs and games | Salvatore De Dominicis | 2010/10/04 01:41 AM |
GPUs and games | Kevin G | 2010/10/05 02:13 PM |
GPUs and games | mpx | 2010/10/03 11:36 AM |
GPUs and games | David Kanter | 2010/10/04 07:08 AM |
GPUs and games | Kevin G | 2010/10/04 10:38 AM |
Sandy Bridge CPU article online | NEON cortex | 2010/11/17 09:19 PM |
Sandy Bridge CPU article online | Ian Ameline | 2010/09/30 12:06 PM |
Sandy Bridge CPU article online | rwessel | 2010/09/30 02:29 PM |
Sandy Bridge CPU article online | Michael S | 2010/09/30 03:06 PM |
Sandy Bridge CPU article online | rwessel | 2010/09/30 06:55 PM |
Sandy Bridge CPU article online | David Hess | 2010/10/01 03:53 AM |
Sandy Bridge CPU article online | rwessel | 2010/10/01 08:30 AM |
Sandy Bridge CPU article online | David Hess | 2010/10/01 09:31 AM |
Sandy Bridge CPU article online | rwessel | 2010/10/01 10:56 AM |
Sandy Bridge CPU article online | David Hess | 2010/10/01 08:28 PM |
Sandy Bridge CPU article online | Ricardo B | 2010/10/02 05:38 AM |
Sandy Bridge CPU article online | David Hess | 2010/10/02 06:59 PM |
which bus more wasteful | Michael S | 2010/10/02 10:38 AM |
which bus more wasteful | rwessel | 2010/10/02 07:15 PM |
Sandy Bridge CPU article online | Ricardo B | 2010/10/01 10:08 AM |
Sandy Bridge CPU article online | David Hess | 2010/10/01 08:31 PM |
Sandy Bridge CPU article online | Andi Kleen | 2010/10/01 11:55 AM |
Sandy Bridge CPU article online | David Hess | 2010/10/01 08:32 PM |
Sandy Bridge CPU article online | kdg | 2010/10/01 11:26 AM |
Sandy Bridge CPU article online | Anon | 2010/10/01 11:33 AM |
Analog display out? | David Kanter | 2010/10/01 01:05 PM |
Analog display out? | mpx | 2010/10/02 11:46 AM |
Analog display out? | Anon | 2010/10/03 03:26 PM |
Digital is expensive! | David Kanter | 2010/10/03 06:36 PM |
Digital is expensive! | Anon | 2010/10/03 08:07 PM |
Digital is expensive! | David Kanter | 2010/10/03 10:02 PM |
Digital is expensive! | Steve Underwood | 2010/10/04 03:52 AM |
Digital is expensive! | David Kanter | 2010/10/04 07:03 AM |
Digital is expensive! | anonymous | 2010/10/04 07:11 AM |
Digital is not very expensive! | Steve Underwood | 2010/10/04 06:08 PM |
Digital is not very expensive! | Anon | 2010/10/04 08:33 PM |
Digital is not very expensive! | Steve Underwood | 2010/10/04 11:03 PM |
Digital is not very expensive! | mpx | 2010/10/05 01:10 PM |
Digital is not very expensive! | Gabriele Svelto | 2010/10/05 12:24 AM |
Digital is expensive! | jal142 | 2010/10/04 11:46 AM |
Digital is expensive! | mpx | 2010/10/04 01:04 AM |
Digital is expensive! | Gabriele Svelto | 2010/10/04 03:28 AM |
Digital is expensive! | Mark Christiansen | 2010/10/04 03:12 PM |
Analog display out? | slacker | 2010/10/03 06:44 PM |
Analog display out? | Anon | 2010/10/03 08:05 PM |
Analog display out? | Steve Underwood | 2010/10/04 03:48 AM |
Sandy Bridge CPU article online | David Hess | 2010/10/01 08:37 PM |
Sandy Bridge CPU article online | slacker | 2010/10/02 02:53 PM |
Sandy Bridge CPU article online | David Hess | 2010/10/02 06:49 PM |
memory bandwith | Max | 2010/09/30 12:19 PM |
memory bandwith | Anon | 2010/10/01 11:28 AM |
memory bandwith | Jack | 2010/10/01 07:45 PM |
memory bandwith | Anon | 2010/10/03 03:19 PM |
Sandy Bridge CPU article online | PiedPiper | 2010/09/30 07:05 PM |
Sandy Bridge CPU article online | Matt Sayler | 2010/09/29 04:38 PM |
Sandy Bridge CPU article online | Jack | 2010/09/29 09:39 PM |
Sandy Bridge CPU article online | mpx | 2010/09/30 12:24 AM |
Sandy Bridge CPU article online | passer | 2010/09/30 03:15 AM |
Sandy Bridge CPU article online | mpx | 2010/09/30 03:47 AM |
Sandy Bridge CPU article online | passer | 2010/09/30 04:25 AM |
SB and web browsing | Rohit | 2010/09/30 06:47 AM |
SB and web browsing | David Hess | 2010/09/30 07:10 AM |
SB and web browsing | MS | 2010/09/30 10:21 AM |
SB and web browsing | passer | 2010/09/30 10:26 AM |
SB and web browsing | MS | 2010/10/02 06:41 PM |
SB and web browsing | Rohit | 2010/10/01 08:02 AM |
Sandy Bridge CPU article online | David Kanter | 2010/09/30 08:35 AM |
Sandy Bridge CPU article online | Jack | 2010/09/30 10:40 PM |
processor evolution | hobold | 2010/09/29 02:16 PM |
processor evolution | Foo_ | 2010/09/30 06:10 AM |
processor evolution | Jack | 2010/09/30 07:07 PM |
3D gaming as GPGPU app | hobold | 2010/10/01 04:59 AM |
3D gaming as GPGPU app | Jack | 2010/10/01 07:39 PM |
processor evolution | hobold | 2010/10/01 04:35 AM |
processor evolution | David Kanter | 2010/10/01 10:02 AM |
processor evolution | Anon | 2010/10/01 11:46 AM |
Display | David Kanter | 2010/10/01 01:26 PM |
Display | Rohit | 2010/10/02 02:56 AM |
Display | Linus Torvalds | 2010/10/02 07:40 AM |
Display | rwessel | 2010/10/02 08:58 AM |
Display | sJ | 2010/10/02 10:28 PM |
Display | rwessel | 2010/10/03 08:38 AM |
Display | Anon | 2010/10/03 03:06 PM |
Display tech and compute are different | David Kanter | 2010/10/03 06:33 PM |
Display tech and compute are different | Anon | 2010/10/03 08:16 PM |
Display tech and compute are different | David Kanter | 2010/10/03 10:00 PM |
Display tech and compute are different | hobold | 2010/10/04 01:40 AM |
Display | ? | 2010/10/03 03:02 AM |
Display | Linus Torvalds | 2010/10/03 10:18 AM |
Display | Richard Cownie | 2010/10/03 11:12 AM |
Display | Linus Torvalds | 2010/10/03 12:16 PM |
Display | slacker | 2010/10/03 07:35 PM |
current V12 engines with >6.0 displacement | anonymous | 2010/10/04 07:06 AM |
current V12 engines with >6.0 displacement | Ricardo B | 2010/10/04 11:44 AM |
current V12 engines with >6.0 displacement | anonymous | 2010/10/04 02:59 PM |
current V12 engines with >6.0 displacement | Ricardo B | 2010/10/04 03:13 PM |
current V12 engines with >6.0 displacement | Aaron Spink | 2010/10/04 08:58 PM |
current V12 engines with >6.0 displacement | slacker | 2010/10/05 01:39 AM |
current V12 engines with >6.0 displacement | MS | 2010/10/05 06:57 AM |
current V12 engines with >6.0 displacement | Ricardo B | 2010/10/05 01:20 PM |
current V12 engines with >6.0 displacement | Aaron Spink | 2010/10/05 09:26 PM |
current V12 engines with >6.0 displacement | slacker | 2010/10/06 05:39 AM |
current V12 engines with >6.0 displacement | Aaron Spink | 2010/10/06 01:22 PM |
current V12 engines with >6.0 displacement | Ricardo B | 2010/10/06 03:07 PM |
current V12 engines with >6.0 displacement | Aaron Spink | 2010/10/06 03:56 PM |
current V12 engines with >6.0 displacement | rwessel | 2010/10/06 03:30 PM |
current V12 engines with >6.0 displacement | Aaron Spink | 2010/10/06 03:53 PM |
current V12 engines with >6.0 displacement | Anonymous | 2010/10/07 01:32 PM |
current V12 engines with >6.0 displacement | rwessel | 2010/10/07 07:54 PM |
current V12 engines with >6.0 displacement | Aaron Spink | 2010/10/07 09:02 PM |
Top Gear is awful, and Jeremy Clarkson cannot drive. | slacker | 2010/10/06 07:20 PM |
Top Gear is awful, and Jeremy Clarkson cannot drive. | Ricardo B | 2010/10/07 01:32 AM |
Top Gear is awful, and Jeremy Clarkson cannot drive. | slacker | 2010/10/07 08:15 AM |
Top Gear is awful, and Jeremy Clarkson cannot drive. | Ricardo B | 2010/10/07 10:51 AM |
current V12 engines with >6.0 displacement | anon | 2010/10/06 05:03 PM |
current V12 engines with >6.0 displacement | Aaron Spink | 2010/10/06 06:26 PM |
current V12 engines with >6.0 displacement | anon | 2010/10/06 11:15 PM |
current V12 engines with >6.0 displacement | Howard Chu | 2010/10/07 02:16 PM |
current V12 engines with >6.0 displacement | Anon | 2010/10/05 10:31 PM |
current V12 engines with >6.0 displacement | slacker | 2010/10/06 05:55 AM |
current V12 engines with >6.0 displacement | Ricardo B | 2010/10/06 06:15 AM |
current V12 engines with >6.0 displacement | slacker | 2010/10/06 06:34 AM |
I wonder is there any tech area that this forum doesn't have an opinion on (NT) | Rob Thorpe | 2010/10/06 10:11 AM |
Cunieform tablets | David Kanter | 2010/10/06 12:57 PM |
Cunieform tablets | Linus Torvalds | 2010/10/06 01:06 PM |
Ouch...maybe I should hire a new editor (NT) | David Kanter | 2010/10/06 04:38 PM |
Cunieform tablets | rwessel | 2010/10/06 03:41 PM |
Cunieform tablets | seni | 2010/10/07 10:56 AM |
Cunieform tablets | Howard Chu | 2010/10/07 01:44 PM |
current V12 engines with >6.0 displacement | Anonymous | 2010/10/06 06:10 PM |
current V12 engines with >6.0 displacement | anonymous | 2010/10/06 10:44 PM |
current V12 engines with >6.0 displacement | slacker | 2010/10/07 07:55 AM |
current V12 engines with >6.0 displacement | anonymous | 2010/10/07 08:51 AM |
current V12 engines with >6.0 displacement | slacker | 2010/10/07 07:38 PM |
current V12 engines with >6.0 displacement | anonymous | 2010/10/07 08:33 PM |
current V12 engines with >6.0 displacement | Aaron Spink | 2010/10/07 09:04 PM |
Practical vehicles for commuting | Rob Thorpe | 2010/10/08 05:50 AM |
Practical vehicles for commuting | Gabriele Svelto | 2010/10/08 06:05 AM |
Practical vehicles for commuting | Rob Thorpe | 2010/10/08 06:21 AM |
Practical vehicles for commuting | j | 2010/10/08 02:20 PM |
Practical vehicles for commuting | Rob Thorpe | 2010/12/09 07:00 AM |
current V12 engines with >6.0 displacement | anonymous | 2010/10/08 10:14 AM |
current V12 engines with >6.0 displacement | Anonymous | 2010/10/07 01:23 PM |
current V12 engines with >6.0 displacement | anon | 2010/10/07 04:08 PM |
current V12 engines with >6.0 displacement | anonymous | 2010/10/07 05:41 PM |
current V12 engines with >6.0 displacement | slacker | 2010/10/07 08:05 PM |
current V12 engines with >6.0 displacement | anonymous | 2010/10/07 08:52 PM |
current V12 engines with >6.0 displacement | Anonymous | 2010/10/08 07:52 PM |
current V12 engines with >6.0 displacement | anon | 2010/10/06 11:28 PM |
current V12 engines with >6.0 displacement | Aaron Spink | 2010/10/07 12:37 AM |
current V12 engines with >6.0 displacement | Ricardo B | 2010/10/07 01:37 AM |
current V12 engines with >6.0 displacement | slacker | 2010/10/05 02:02 AM |
Display | Linus Torvalds | 2010/10/04 10:39 AM |
Display | Gabriele Svelto | 2010/10/05 12:34 AM |
Display | Richard Cownie | 2010/10/04 06:22 AM |
Display | anon | 2010/10/04 09:22 PM |
Display | Richard Cownie | 2010/10/05 06:42 AM |
Display | mpx | 2010/10/03 11:55 AM |
Display | rcf | 2010/10/03 01:12 PM |
Display | mpx | 2010/10/03 02:36 PM |
Display | rcf | 2010/10/03 05:36 PM |
Display | Ricardo B | 2010/10/04 02:50 PM |
Display | gallier2 | 2010/10/05 03:44 AM |
Display | David Hess | 2010/10/05 05:21 AM |
Display | gallier2 | 2010/10/05 08:21 AM |
Display | David Hess | 2010/10/03 11:21 PM |
Display | rcf | 2010/10/04 08:06 AM |
Display | David Kanter | 2010/10/03 01:54 PM |
Alternative integration | Paul A. Clayton | 2010/10/06 08:51 AM |
Display | slacker | 2010/10/03 07:26 PM |
Display & marketing & analogies | ? | 2010/10/04 02:33 AM |
Display & marketing & analogies | kdg | 2010/10/04 06:00 AM |
Display | Kevin G | 2010/10/02 09:49 AM |
Display | Anon | 2010/10/03 03:43 PM |
Sandy Bridge CPU article online | David Kanter | 2010/09/29 03:17 PM |
Sandy Bridge CPU article online | Jack | 2010/09/28 06:27 AM |
Sandy Bridge CPU article online | IntelUser2000 | 2010/09/28 03:07 AM |
Sandy Bridge CPU article online | mpx | 2010/09/28 12:34 PM |
Sandy Bridge CPU article online | Aaron Spink | 2010/09/28 01:28 PM |
Sandy Bridge CPU article online | JoshW | 2010/09/28 02:13 PM |
Sandy Bridge CPU article online | mpx | 2010/09/28 02:54 PM |
Sandy Bridge CPU article online | Foo_ | 2010/09/29 01:19 AM |
Sandy Bridge CPU article online | mpx | 2010/09/29 03:06 AM |
Sandy Bridge CPU article online | JS | 2010/09/29 03:42 AM |
Sandy Bridge CPU article online | mpx | 2010/09/29 04:03 AM |
Sandy Bridge CPU article online | Foo_ | 2010/09/29 05:55 AM |
Sandy Bridge CPU article online | ajensen | 2010/09/28 12:19 AM |
Sandy Bridge CPU article online | Ian Ollmann | 2010/09/28 04:52 PM |
Sandy Bridge CPU article online | a reader | 2010/09/28 05:05 PM |
Sandy Bridge CPU article online | ajensen | 2010/09/28 11:35 PM |
Updated: Sandy Bridge CPU article | David Kanter | 2010/10/01 05:11 AM |
Updated: Sandy Bridge CPU article | anon | 2011/01/07 09:55 PM |
Updated: Sandy Bridge CPU article | Eric Bron | 2011/01/08 03:29 AM |
Updated: Sandy Bridge CPU article | anon | 2011/01/11 11:24 PM |
Updated: Sandy Bridge CPU article | anon | 2011/01/15 11:21 AM |
David Kanter can you shed some light? Re Updated: Sandy Bridge CPU article | anon | 2011/01/16 11:22 PM |
David Kanter can you shed some light? Re Updated: Sandy Bridge CPU article | anonymous | 2011/01/17 02:04 AM |
David Kanter can you shed some light? Re Updated: Sandy Bridge CPU article | anon | 2011/01/17 07:12 AM |
I can try.... | David Kanter | 2011/01/18 03:54 PM |
I can try.... | anon | 2011/01/18 08:07 PM |
I can try.... | David Kanter | 2011/01/18 11:24 PM |
I can try.... | anon | 2011/01/19 07:51 AM |
Wider fetch than execute makes sense | Paul A. Clayton | 2011/01/19 08:53 AM |
Sandy Bridge CPU article online | Nicolas Capens | 2011/01/04 07:29 AM |
Sandy Bridge CPU article online | Seni | 2011/01/04 09:07 PM |
Sandy Bridge CPU article online | hobold | 2011/01/04 11:26 PM |
Sandy Bridge CPU article online | Michael S | 2011/01/05 02:01 AM |
software assist exceptions | hobold | 2011/01/05 04:36 PM |
Sandy Bridge CPU article online | Michael S | 2011/01/05 01:58 AM |
Sandy Bridge CPU article online | anon | 2011/01/05 04:51 AM |
Sandy Bridge CPU article online | Seni | 2011/01/05 08:53 AM |
Sandy Bridge CPU article online | Michael S | 2011/01/05 09:03 AM |
Sandy Bridge CPU article online | anon | 2011/01/05 04:14 PM |
Sandy Bridge CPU article online | Nicolas Capens | 2011/01/05 04:50 AM |
Sandy Bridge CPU article online | Gabriele Svelto | 2011/01/05 05:00 AM |
Sandy Bridge CPU article online | Nicolas Capens | 2011/01/05 07:26 AM |
Sandy Bridge CPU article online | Gabriele Svelto | 2011/01/05 07:50 AM |
Sandy Bridge CPU article online | Michael S | 2011/01/05 08:39 AM |
Sandy Bridge CPU article online | Nicolas Capens | 2011/01/05 03:50 PM |
permuting vector elements | hobold | 2011/01/05 05:03 PM |
permuting vector elements | Nicolas Capens | 2011/01/05 06:01 PM |
permuting vector elements | Nicolas Capens | 2011/01/06 08:27 AM |
Sandy Bridge CPU article online | Gabriele Svelto | 2011/01/11 11:33 AM |
Sandy Bridge CPU article online | EduardoS | 2011/01/11 01:51 PM |
Sandy Bridge CPU article online | hobold | 2011/01/11 02:11 PM |
Sandy Bridge CPU article online | David Kanter | 2011/01/11 06:07 PM |
Sandy Bridge CPU article online | Michael S | 2011/01/12 03:25 AM |
Sandy Bridge CPU article online | hobold | 2011/01/12 05:03 PM |
Sandy Bridge CPU article online | David Kanter | 2011/01/12 11:27 PM |
Sandy Bridge CPU article online | Eric Bron | 2011/01/13 02:38 AM |
Sandy Bridge CPU article online | Michael S | 2011/01/13 03:32 AM |
Sandy Bridge CPU article online | hobold | 2011/01/13 01:53 PM |
What happened to VPERMIL2PS? | Michael S | 2011/01/13 03:46 AM |
What happened to VPERMIL2PS? | Eric Bron | 2011/01/13 06:46 AM |
Lower cost permute | Paul A. Clayton | 2011/01/13 12:11 PM |
Sandy Bridge CPU article online | anon | 2011/01/25 06:31 PM |
Sandy Bridge CPU article online | Nicolas Capens | 2011/01/12 06:34 PM |
Sandy Bridge CPU article online | Gabriele Svelto | 2011/01/13 07:38 AM |
Sandy Bridge CPU article online | Nicolas Capens | 2011/01/15 09:47 PM |
Sandy Bridge CPU article online | Gabriele Svelto | 2011/01/16 03:13 AM |
And just to make a further example | Gabriele Svelto | 2011/01/16 04:24 AM |
Sandy Bridge CPU article online | mpx | 2011/01/16 01:27 PM |
Sandy Bridge CPU article online | Nicolas Capens | 2011/01/25 02:56 PM |
Sandy Bridge CPU article online | David Kanter | 2011/01/25 04:11 PM |
Sandy Bridge CPU article online | Nicolas Capens | 2011/01/26 08:49 AM |
Sandy Bridge CPU article online | EduardoS | 2011/01/26 04:35 PM |
Sandy Bridge CPU article online | Nicolas Capens | 2011/01/27 02:51 AM |
Sandy Bridge CPU article online | EduardoS | 2011/01/27 02:40 PM |
Sandy Bridge CPU article online | Nicolas Capens | 2011/01/28 03:24 AM |
Sandy Bridge CPU article online | Eric Bron | 2011/01/28 03:49 AM |
Sandy Bridge CPU article online | Nicolas Capens | 2011/01/30 02:11 PM |
Sandy Bridge CPU article online | Eric Bron | 2011/01/31 03:43 AM |
Sandy Bridge CPU article online | Nicolas Capens | 2011/02/01 04:02 AM |
Sandy Bridge CPU article online | Eric Bron | 2011/02/01 04:28 AM |
Sandy Bridge CPU article online | Eric Bron | 2011/02/01 04:43 AM |
Sandy Bridge CPU article online | EduardoS | 2011/01/28 07:14 PM |
Sandy Bridge CPU article online | Nicolas Capens | 2011/02/01 02:58 AM |
Sandy Bridge CPU article online | EduardoS | 2011/02/01 02:36 PM |
Sandy Bridge CPU article online | anon | 2011/02/01 04:56 PM |
Sandy Bridge CPU article online | EduardoS | 2011/02/01 09:17 PM |
Sandy Bridge CPU article online | anon | 2011/02/01 10:13 PM |
Sandy Bridge CPU article online | Eric Bron | 2011/02/02 04:08 AM |
Sandy Bridge CPU article online | Eric Bron | 2011/02/02 04:26 AM |
Sandy Bridge CPU article online | kalmaegi | 2011/02/01 09:29 AM |
SW Rasterization | David Kanter | 2011/01/27 05:18 PM |
Lower pin count memory | iz | 2011/01/27 09:19 PM |
Lower pin count memory | David Kanter | 2011/01/27 09:25 PM |
Lower pin count memory | iz | 2011/01/27 11:31 PM |
Lower pin count memory | David Kanter | 2011/01/27 11:52 PM |
Lower pin count memory | iz | 2011/01/28 12:28 AM |
Lower pin count memory | David Kanter | 2011/01/28 01:05 AM |
Lower pin count memory | iz | 2011/01/28 03:55 AM |
Lower pin count memory | David Hess | 2011/01/28 01:15 PM |
Lower pin count memory | David Kanter | 2011/01/28 01:57 PM |
Lower pin count memory | iz | 2011/01/28 05:20 PM |
Two years later | ForgotPants | 2013/10/26 11:33 AM |
Two years later | anon | 2013/10/26 11:36 AM |
Two years later | Exophase | 2013/10/26 12:56 PM |
Two years later | David Hess | 2013/10/26 05:05 PM |
Herz is totally the thing you DON*T care. | Jouni Osmala | 2013/10/27 01:48 AM |
Herz is totally the thing you DON*T care. | EduardoS | 2013/10/27 07:00 AM |
Herz is totally the thing you DON*T care. | Michael S | 2013/10/27 07:45 AM |
Two years later | someone | 2013/10/28 07:21 AM |
Lower pin count memory | Martin Høyer Kristiansen | 2011/01/28 01:41 AM |
Lower pin count memory | iz | 2011/01/28 03:07 AM |
Lower pin count memory | Darrell Coker | 2011/01/27 10:39 PM |
Lower pin count memory | iz | 2011/01/28 12:20 AM |
Lower pin count memory | Darrell Coker | 2011/01/28 06:07 PM |
Lower pin count memory | iz | 2011/01/28 11:57 PM |
Lower pin count memory | Darrell Coker | 2011/01/29 02:21 AM |
Lower pin count memory | iz | 2011/01/31 10:28 PM |
SW Rasterization | Nicolas Capens | 2011/02/02 08:48 AM |
SW Rasterization | Eric Bron | 2011/02/02 09:37 AM |
SW Rasterization | Nicolas Capens | 2011/02/02 04:35 PM |
SW Rasterization | Eric Bron | 2011/02/02 05:11 PM |
SW Rasterization | Eric Bron | 2011/02/03 02:13 AM |
SW Rasterization | Nicolas Capens | 2011/02/04 07:57 AM |
SW Rasterization | Eric Bron | 2011/02/04 08:50 AM |
erratum | Eric Bron | 2011/02/04 08:58 AM |
SW Rasterization | Nicolas Capens | 2011/02/04 05:25 PM |
SW Rasterization | David Kanter | 2011/02/04 05:33 PM |
SW Rasterization | anon | 2011/02/04 06:04 PM |
SW Rasterization | Nicolas Capens | 2011/02/05 03:39 PM |
SW Rasterization | David Kanter | 2011/02/05 05:07 PM |
SW Rasterization | Nicolas Capens | 2011/02/05 11:39 PM |
SW Rasterization | Eric Bron | 2011/02/04 10:55 AM |
Comments pt 1 | David Kanter | 2011/02/02 01:08 PM |
Comments pt 1 | Eric Bron | 2011/02/02 03:16 PM |
Comments pt 1 | Gabriele Svelto | 2011/02/03 01:37 AM |
Comments pt 1 | Eric Bron | 2011/02/03 02:36 AM |
Comments pt 1 | Nicolas Capens | 2011/02/03 11:08 PM |
Comments pt 1 | Nicolas Capens | 2011/02/03 10:26 PM |
Comments pt 1 | Eric Bron | 2011/02/04 03:33 AM |
Comments pt 1 | Nicolas Capens | 2011/02/04 05:24 AM |
example code | Eric Bron | 2011/02/04 04:51 AM |
example code | Nicolas Capens | 2011/02/04 08:24 AM |
example code | Eric Bron | 2011/02/04 08:36 AM |
example code | Nicolas Capens | 2011/02/05 11:43 PM |
Comments pt 1 | Rohit | 2011/02/04 12:43 PM |
Comments pt 1 | Nicolas Capens | 2011/02/04 05:05 PM |
Comments pt 1 | David Kanter | 2011/02/04 05:36 PM |
Comments pt 1 | Nicolas Capens | 2011/02/05 02:45 PM |
Comments pt 1 | Eric Bron | 2011/02/05 04:13 PM |
Comments pt 1 | Nicolas Capens | 2011/02/05 11:52 PM |
Comments pt 1 | Eric Bron | 2011/02/06 01:31 AM |
Comments pt 1 | Nicolas Capens | 2011/02/06 04:06 PM |
Comments pt 1 | Eric Bron | 2011/02/07 03:12 AM |
The need for gather/scatter support | Nicolas Capens | 2011/02/10 10:07 AM |
The need for gather/scatter support | Eric Bron | 2011/02/11 03:11 AM |
Gather/scatter performance data | Nicolas Capens | 2011/02/13 03:39 AM |
Gather/scatter performance data | Eric Bron | 2011/02/13 07:46 AM |
Gather/scatter performance data | Nicolas Capens | 2011/02/14 07:48 AM |
Gather/scatter performance data | Eric Bron | 2011/02/14 09:32 AM |
Gather/scatter performance data | Eric Bron | 2011/02/14 10:07 AM |
Gather/scatter performance data | Eric Bron | 2011/02/13 09:00 AM |
Gather/scatter performance data | Nicolas Capens | 2011/02/14 07:49 AM |
Gather/scatter performance data | Eric Bron | 2011/02/15 02:23 AM |
Gather/scatter performance data | Eric Bron | 2011/02/13 05:06 PM |
Gather/scatter performance data | Nicolas Capens | 2011/02/14 07:52 AM |
Gather/scatter performance data | Eric Bron | 2011/02/14 09:43 AM |
SW Rasterization - a long way off | Rohit | 2011/02/02 01:17 PM |
SW Rasterization - a long way off | Nicolas Capens | 2011/02/04 03:59 AM |
CPU only rendering - a long way off | Rohit | 2011/02/04 11:52 AM |
CPU only rendering - a long way off | Nicolas Capens | 2011/02/04 07:15 PM |
CPU only rendering - a long way off | Rohit | 2011/02/05 02:00 AM |
CPU only rendering - a long way off | Nicolas Capens | 2011/02/05 09:45 PM |
CPU only rendering - a long way off | David Kanter | 2011/02/06 09:51 PM |
CPU only rendering - a long way off | Gian-Carlo Pascutto | 2011/02/07 12:22 AM |
Encryption | David Kanter | 2011/02/07 01:18 AM |
Encryption | Nicolas Capens | 2011/02/07 07:51 AM |
Encryption | David Kanter | 2011/02/07 11:50 AM |
Encryption | Nicolas Capens | 2011/02/08 10:26 AM |
CPUs are latency optimized | David Kanter | 2011/02/08 11:38 AM |
efficient compiler on an efficient GPU real today. | sJ | 2011/02/08 11:29 PM |
CPUs are latency optimized | Nicolas Capens | 2011/02/09 09:49 PM |
CPUs are latency optimized | Eric Bron | 2011/02/10 12:49 AM |
CPUs are latency optimized | Antti-Ville Tuunainen | 2011/02/10 06:16 AM |
CPUs are latency optimized | Nicolas Capens | 2011/02/10 07:04 AM |
CPUs are latency optimized | Eric Bron | 2011/02/10 07:48 AM |
CPUs are latency optimized | Nicolas Capens | 2011/02/10 01:31 PM |
CPUs are latency optimized | Eric Bron | 2011/02/11 02:43 AM |
CPUs are latency optimized | Nicolas Capens | 2011/02/11 07:31 AM |
CPUs are latency optimized | EduardoS | 2011/02/10 05:29 PM |
CPUs are latency optimized | Anon | 2011/02/10 06:40 PM |
CPUs are latency optimized | David Kanter | 2011/02/10 08:33 PM |
CPUs are latency optimized | EduardoS | 2011/02/11 02:18 PM |
CPUs are latency optimized | Nicolas Capens | 2011/02/11 05:56 AM |
CPUs are latency optimized | Rohit | 2011/02/11 07:33 AM |
CPUs are latency optimized | Nicolas Capens | 2011/02/14 02:19 AM |
CPUs are latency optimized | Eric Bron | 2011/02/14 03:23 AM |
CPUs are latency optimized | EduardoS | 2011/02/14 01:11 PM |
CPUs are latency optimized | David Kanter | 2011/02/11 02:45 PM |
CPUs are latency optimized | Nicolas Capens | 2011/02/15 05:22 AM |
CPUs are latency optimized | David Kanter | 2011/02/15 12:47 PM |
CPUs are latency optimized | Nicolas Capens | 2011/02/15 07:10 PM |
Have fun | David Kanter | 2011/02/15 10:04 PM |
Have fun | Nicolas Capens | 2011/02/17 03:59 AM |
Have fun | Brett | 2011/02/17 12:56 PM |
Have fun | Nicolas Capens | 2011/02/19 04:53 PM |
Have fun | Brett | 2011/02/20 06:08 PM |
Have fun | Brett | 2011/02/20 07:13 PM |
On-die storage to fight Amdahl | Nicolas Capens | 2011/02/23 05:37 PM |
On-die storage to fight Amdahl | Brett | 2011/02/23 09:59 PM |
On-die storage to fight Amdahl | Brett | 2011/02/23 10:08 PM |
On-die storage to fight Amdahl | Nicolas Capens | 2011/02/24 07:42 PM |
On-die storage to fight Amdahl | Rohit | 2011/02/25 11:02 PM |
On-die storage to fight Amdahl | Nicolas Capens | 2011/03/09 06:53 PM |
On-die storage to fight Amdahl | Rohit | 2011/03/10 08:02 AM |
NVIDIA using tile based rendering? | Nathan Monson | 2011/03/11 07:58 PM |
NVIDIA using tile based rendering? | Rohit | 2011/03/12 04:29 AM |
NVIDIA using tile based rendering? | Nathan Monson | 2011/03/12 11:05 AM |
NVIDIA using tile based rendering? | Rohit | 2011/03/12 11:16 AM |
On-die storage to fight Amdahl | Brett | 2011/02/26 02:10 AM |
On-die storage to fight Amdahl | Nathan Monson | 2011/02/26 01:51 PM |
On-die storage to fight Amdahl | Brett | 2011/02/26 04:40 PM |
Convergence is inevitable | Nicolas Capens | 2011/03/09 08:22 PM |
Convergence is inevitable | Brett | 2011/03/09 10:59 PM |
Convergence is inevitable | Antti-Ville Tuunainen | 2011/03/10 03:34 PM |
Convergence is inevitable | Brett | 2011/03/10 09:39 PM |
Procedural texturing? | David Kanter | 2011/03/11 01:32 AM |
Procedural texturing? | hobold | 2011/03/11 03:59 AM |
Procedural texturing? | Dan Downs | 2011/03/11 09:28 AM |
Procedural texturing? | Mark Roulo | 2011/03/11 02:58 PM |
Procedural texturing? | Anon | 2011/03/11 06:11 PM |
Procedural texturing? | Nathan Monson | 2011/03/11 07:30 PM |
Procedural texturing? | Brett | 2011/03/15 07:45 AM |
Procedural texturing? | Seni | 2011/03/15 10:13 AM |
Procedural texturing? | Brett | 2011/03/15 11:45 AM |
Procedural texturing? | Seni | 2011/03/15 02:09 PM |
Procedural texturing? | Brett | 2011/03/11 10:02 PM |
Procedural texturing? | Brett | 2011/03/11 09:34 PM |
Procedural texturing? | Eric Bron | 2011/03/12 03:37 AM |
Convergence is inevitable | Jouni Osmala | 2011/03/09 11:28 PM |
Convergence is inevitable | Brett | 2011/04/05 05:08 PM |
Convergence is inevitable | Nicolas Capens | 2011/04/07 05:23 AM |
Convergence is inevitable | none | 2011/04/07 07:03 AM |
Convergence is inevitable | Nicolas Capens | 2011/04/07 10:34 AM |
Convergence is inevitable | anon | 2011/04/07 02:15 PM |
Convergence is inevitable | none | 2011/04/08 01:57 AM |
Convergence is inevitable | Brett | 2011/04/07 08:04 PM |
Convergence is inevitable | none | 2011/04/08 02:14 AM |
Gather implementation | David Kanter | 2011/04/08 12:01 PM |
RAM Latency | David Hess | 2011/04/07 08:22 AM |
RAM Latency | Brett | 2011/04/07 07:20 PM |
RAM Latency | Nicolas Capens | 2011/04/07 10:18 PM |
RAM Latency | Brett | 2011/04/08 05:33 AM |
RAM Latency | Nicolas Capens | 2011/04/10 02:23 PM |
RAM Latency | Rohit | 2011/04/08 06:57 AM |
RAM Latency | Nicolas Capens | 2011/04/10 01:23 PM |
RAM Latency | David Kanter | 2011/04/10 02:27 PM |
RAM Latency | Rohit | 2011/04/11 06:17 AM |
Convergence is inevitable | Eric Bron | 2011/04/07 09:46 AM |
Convergence is inevitable | Nicolas Capens | 2011/04/07 09:50 PM |
Convergence is inevitable | Eric Bron | 2011/04/08 12:39 AM |
Flaws in PowerVR | Rohit | 2011/02/25 11:21 PM |
Flaws in PowerVR | Brett | 2011/02/26 12:37 AM |
Flaws in PowerVR | Paul | 2011/02/26 05:17 AM |
Have fun | David Kanter | 2011/02/18 12:52 PM |
Have fun | Michael S | 2011/02/19 12:12 PM |
Have fun | David Kanter | 2011/02/19 03:26 PM |
Have fun | Michael S | 2011/02/19 04:43 PM |
Have fun | anon | 2011/02/19 05:02 PM |
Have fun | Michael S | 2011/02/19 05:56 PM |
Have fun | anon | 2011/02/20 03:50 PM |
Have fun | EduardoS | 2011/02/20 02:44 PM |
Linear vs non-linear | EduardoS | 2011/02/20 02:55 PM |
Have fun | Michael S | 2011/02/20 04:19 PM |
Have fun | EduardoS | 2011/02/20 05:51 PM |
Have fun | Nicolas Capens | 2011/02/21 11:12 AM |
Have fun | Michael S | 2011/02/21 12:38 PM |
Have fun | Eric Bron | 2011/02/21 02:10 PM |
Have fun | Eric Bron | 2011/02/21 02:39 PM |
Have fun | Michael S | 2011/02/21 06:13 PM |
Have fun | Eric Bron | 2011/02/22 12:43 AM |
Have fun | Michael S | 2011/02/22 01:47 AM |
Have fun | Eric Bron | 2011/02/22 02:10 AM |
Have fun | Michael S | 2011/02/22 11:37 AM |
Have fun | anon | 2011/02/22 01:38 PM |
Have fun | EduardoS | 2011/02/22 03:49 PM |
Gather/scatter efficiency | Nicolas Capens | 2011/02/23 06:37 PM |
Gather/scatter efficiency | anonymous | 2011/02/23 06:51 PM |
Gather/scatter efficiency | Nicolas Capens | 2011/02/24 06:57 PM |
Gather/scatter efficiency | anonymous | 2011/02/24 07:16 PM |
Gather/scatter efficiency | Michael S | 2011/02/25 07:45 AM |
Gather implementation | David Kanter | 2011/02/25 05:34 PM |
Gather implementation | Michael S | 2011/02/26 10:40 AM |
Gather implementation | anon | 2011/02/26 11:52 AM |
Gather implementation | Michael S | 2011/02/26 12:16 PM |
Gather implementation | anon | 2011/02/26 11:22 PM |
Gather implementation | Michael S | 2011/02/27 07:23 AM |
Gather/scatter efficiency | Nicolas Capens | 2011/02/28 03:14 PM |
Consider yourself ignored | David Kanter | 2011/02/22 01:05 AM |
one more anti-FMA flame. By me. | Michael S | 2011/02/16 07:40 AM |
one more anti-FMA flame. By me. | Eric Bron | 2011/02/16 08:30 AM |
one more anti-FMA flame. By me. | Eric Bron | 2011/02/16 09:15 AM |
one more anti-FMA flame. By me. | Nicolas Capens | 2011/02/17 06:27 AM |
anti-FMA != anti-throughput or anti-SG | Michael S | 2011/02/17 07:42 AM |
anti-FMA != anti-throughput or anti-SG | Nicolas Capens | 2011/02/17 05:46 PM |
Tarantula paper | Paul A. Clayton | 2011/02/18 12:38 AM |
Tarantula paper | Nicolas Capens | 2011/02/19 05:19 PM |
anti-FMA != anti-throughput or anti-SG | Eric Bron | 2011/02/18 01:48 AM |
anti-FMA != anti-throughput or anti-SG | Nicolas Capens | 2011/02/20 03:46 PM |
anti-FMA != anti-throughput or anti-SG | Michael S | 2011/02/20 05:00 PM |
anti-FMA != anti-throughput or anti-SG | Nicolas Capens | 2011/02/23 04:05 AM |
Software pipelining on x86 | David Kanter | 2011/02/23 05:04 AM |
Software pipelining on x86 | JS | 2011/02/23 05:25 AM |
Software pipelining on x86 | Salvatore De Dominicis | 2011/02/23 08:37 AM |
Software pipelining on x86 | Jouni Osmala | 2011/02/23 09:10 AM |
Software pipelining on x86 | LeeMiller | 2011/02/23 10:07 PM |
Software pipelining on x86 | Nicolas Capens | 2011/02/24 03:17 PM |
Software pipelining on x86 | anonymous | 2011/02/24 07:04 PM |
Software pipelining on x86 | Nicolas Capens | 2011/02/28 09:27 AM |
Software pipelining on x86 | Antti-Ville Tuunainen | 2011/03/02 04:31 AM |
Software pipelining on x86 | Megol | 2011/03/02 12:55 PM |
Software pipelining on x86 | Geert Bosch | 2011/03/03 07:58 AM |
FMA benefits and latency predictions | David Kanter | 2011/02/25 05:14 PM |
FMA benefits and latency predictions | Antti-Ville Tuunainen | 2011/02/26 10:43 AM |
FMA benefits and latency predictions | Matt Waldhauer | 2011/02/27 06:42 AM |
FMA benefits and latency predictions | Nicolas Capens | 2011/03/09 06:11 PM |
FMA benefits and latency predictions | Rohit | 2011/03/10 08:11 AM |
FMA benefits and latency predictions | Eric Bron | 2011/03/10 09:30 AM |
anti-FMA != anti-throughput or anti-SG | Michael S | 2011/02/23 05:19 AM |
anti-FMA != anti-throughput or anti-SG | Nicolas Capens | 2011/02/23 07:50 AM |
anti-FMA != anti-throughput or anti-SG | Michael S | 2011/02/23 10:37 AM |
FMA and beyond | Nicolas Capens | 2011/02/24 04:47 PM |
detour on terminology | hobold | 2011/02/24 07:08 PM |
detour on terminology | Nicolas Capens | 2011/02/28 02:24 PM |
detour on terminology | Eric Bron | 2011/03/01 02:38 AM |
detour on terminology | Michael S | 2011/03/01 05:03 AM |
detour on terminology | Eric Bron | 2011/03/01 05:39 AM |
detour on terminology | Michael S | 2011/03/01 08:33 AM |
detour on terminology | Eric Bron | 2011/03/01 09:34 AM |
erratum | Eric Bron | 2011/03/01 09:54 AM |
detour on terminology | Nicolas Capens | 2011/03/10 08:39 AM |
detour on terminology | Eric Bron | 2011/03/10 09:50 AM |
anti-FMA != anti-throughput or anti-SG | Nicolas Capens | 2011/02/23 06:12 AM |
anti-FMA != anti-throughput or anti-SG | David Kanter | 2011/02/20 11:25 PM |
anti-FMA != anti-throughput or anti-SG | David Kanter | 2011/02/17 06:51 PM |
Tarantula vector unit well-integrated | Paul A. Clayton | 2011/02/18 12:38 AM |
anti-FMA != anti-throughput or anti-SG | Megol | 2011/02/19 02:17 PM |
anti-FMA != anti-throughput or anti-SG | David Kanter | 2011/02/20 02:09 AM |
anti-FMA != anti-throughput or anti-SG | Megol | 2011/02/20 09:55 AM |
anti-FMA != anti-throughput or anti-SG | David Kanter | 2011/02/20 01:39 PM |
anti-FMA != anti-throughput or anti-SG | EduardoS | 2011/02/20 02:35 PM |
anti-FMA != anti-throughput or anti-SG | Megol | 2011/02/21 08:12 AM |
anti-FMA != anti-throughput or anti-SG | anon | 2011/02/17 10:44 PM |
anti-FMA != anti-throughput or anti-SG | Michael S | 2011/02/18 06:20 AM |
one more anti-FMA flame. By me. | Eric Bron | 2011/02/17 08:24 AM |
thanks | Michael S | 2011/02/17 04:56 PM |
CPUs are latency optimized | EduardoS | 2011/02/15 01:24 PM |
SwiftShader SNB test | Eric Bron | 2011/02/15 03:46 PM |
SwiftShader NHM test | Eric Bron | 2011/02/15 04:50 PM |
SwiftShader SNB test | Nicolas Capens | 2011/02/17 12:06 AM |
SwiftShader SNB test | Eric Bron | 2011/02/17 01:21 AM |
SwiftShader SNB test | Eric Bron | 2011/02/22 10:32 AM |
SwiftShader SNB test 2nd run | Eric Bron | 2011/02/22 10:51 AM |
SwiftShader SNB test 2nd run | Nicolas Capens | 2011/02/23 02:14 PM |
SwiftShader SNB test 2nd run | Eric Bron | 2011/02/23 02:42 PM |
Win7SP1 out but no AVX hype? | Michael S | 2011/02/24 03:14 AM |
Win7SP1 out but no AVX hype? | Eric Bron | 2011/02/24 03:39 AM |
CPUs are latency optimized | Eric Bron | 2011/02/15 08:02 AM |
CPUs are latency optimized | EduardoS | 2011/02/11 03:40 PM |
CPU only rendering - not a long way off | Nicolas Capens | 2011/02/07 06:45 AM |
CPU only rendering - not a long way off | David Kanter | 2011/02/07 12:09 PM |
CPU only rendering - not a long way off | anonymous | 2011/02/07 10:25 PM |
Sandy Bridge IGP EUs | David Kanter | 2011/02/07 11:22 PM |
Sandy Bridge IGP EUs | Hannes | 2011/02/08 05:59 AM |
SW Rasterization - Why? | Seni | 2011/02/02 02:53 PM |
Market reasons to ditch the IGP | Nicolas Capens | 2011/02/10 03:12 PM |
Market reasons to ditch the IGP | Seni | 2011/02/11 05:42 AM |
Market reasons to ditch the IGP | Nicolas Capens | 2011/02/16 04:29 AM |
Market reasons to ditch the IGP | Seni | 2011/02/16 01:39 PM |
An excellent post! | David Kanter | 2011/02/16 03:18 PM |
CPUs clock higher | Moritz | 2011/02/17 08:06 AM |
Market reasons to ditch the IGP | Nicolas Capens | 2011/02/18 06:22 PM |
Market reasons to ditch the IGP | IntelUser2000 | 2011/02/18 07:20 PM |
Market reasons to ditch the IGP | Nicolas Capens | 2011/02/21 02:42 PM |
Bad data (repeated) | David Kanter | 2011/02/22 12:21 AM |
Bad data (repeated) | none | 2011/02/22 03:04 AM |
13W or 8W? | Foo_ | 2011/02/22 06:00 AM |
13W or 8W? | Linus Torvalds | 2011/02/22 08:58 AM |
13W or 8W? | David Kanter | 2011/02/22 11:33 AM |
13W or 8W? | Mark Christiansen | 2011/02/22 02:47 PM |
Bigger picture | Nicolas Capens | 2011/02/24 06:33 PM |
Bigger picture | Nicolas Capens | 2011/02/24 08:06 PM |
20+ Watt | Nicolas Capens | 2011/02/24 08:18 PM |
<20W | David Kanter | 2011/02/25 01:13 PM |
>20W | Nicolas Capens | 2011/03/08 07:34 PM |
IGP is 3X more efficient | David Kanter | 2011/03/08 10:53 PM |
IGP is 3X more efficient | Eric Bron | 2011/03/09 02:44 AM |
>20W | Eric Bron | 2011/03/09 03:48 AM |
Specious data and claims are still specious | David Kanter | 2011/02/25 02:38 AM |
IGP power consumption, LRB samplers | Nicolas Capens | 2011/03/08 06:24 PM |
IGP power consumption, LRB samplers | EduardoS | 2011/03/08 06:52 PM |
IGP power consumption, LRB samplers | Rohit | 2011/03/09 07:42 AM |
Market reasons to ditch the IGP | none | 2011/02/22 02:58 AM |
Market reasons to ditch the IGP | Nicolas Capens | 2011/02/24 06:43 PM |
Market reasons to ditch the IGP | slacker | 2011/02/22 02:32 PM |
Market reasons to ditch the IGP | Seni | 2011/02/18 09:51 PM |
Correction - 28 comparators, not 36. (NT) | Seni | 2011/02/18 10:03 PM |
Market reasons to ditch the IGP | Gabriele Svelto | 2011/02/19 01:49 AM |
Market reasons to ditch the IGP | Seni | 2011/02/19 11:59 AM |
Market reasons to ditch the IGP | Exophase | 2011/02/20 10:43 AM |
Market reasons to ditch the IGP | EduardoS | 2011/02/19 10:13 AM |
Market reasons to ditch the IGP | Seni | 2011/02/19 11:46 AM |
The next revolution | Nicolas Capens | 2011/02/22 03:33 AM |
The next revolution | Gabriele Svelto | 2011/02/22 09:15 AM |
The next revolution | Eric Bron | 2011/02/22 09:48 AM |
The next revolution | Nicolas Capens | 2011/02/23 07:39 PM |
The next revolution | Gabriele Svelto | 2011/02/24 12:43 AM |
GPGPU content creation (or lack of it) | Nicolas Capens | 2011/02/28 07:39 AM |
GPGPU content creation (or lack of it) | The market begs to differ | 2011/03/01 06:32 AM |
GPGPU content creation (or lack of it) | Nicolas Capens | 2011/03/09 09:14 PM |
GPGPU content creation (or lack of it) | Gabriele Svelto | 2011/03/10 01:01 AM |
The market begs to differ | Gabriele Svelto | 2011/03/01 06:33 AM |
The next revolution | Anon | 2011/02/24 02:15 AM |
The next revolution | Nicolas Capens | 2011/02/28 02:34 PM |
The next revolution | Seni | 2011/02/22 02:02 PM |
The next revolution | Gabriele Svelto | 2011/02/23 06:27 AM |
The next revolution | Seni | 2011/02/23 09:03 AM |
The next revolution | Nicolas Capens | 2011/02/24 06:11 AM |
The next revolution | Seni | 2011/02/24 08:45 PM |
IGP sampler count | Nicolas Capens | 2011/03/03 05:19 AM |
Latency and throughput optimized cores | Nicolas Capens | 2011/03/07 03:28 PM |
The real reason no IGP /CPU converge. | Jouni Osmala | 2011/03/07 11:34 PM |
Still converging | Nicolas Capens | 2011/03/13 03:08 PM |
Homogeneous CPU advantages | Nicolas Capens | 2011/03/08 12:12 AM |
Homogeneous CPU advantages | Seni | 2011/03/08 09:23 AM |
Homogeneous CPU advantages | David Kanter | 2011/03/08 11:16 AM |
Homogeneous CPU advantages | Brett | 2011/03/09 03:37 AM |
Homogeneous CPU advantages | Jouni Osmala | 2011/03/09 12:27 AM |
SW Rasterization | firsttimeposter | 2011/02/03 11:18 PM |
SW Rasterization | Nicolas Capens | 2011/02/04 04:48 AM |
SW Rasterization | Eric Bron | 2011/02/04 05:14 AM |
SW Rasterization | Nicolas Capens | 2011/02/04 08:36 AM |
SW Rasterization | Eric Bron | 2011/02/04 08:42 AM |
Sandy Bridge CPU article online | Eric Bron | 2011/01/26 03:23 AM |
Sandy Bridge CPU article online | Gabriele Svelto | 2011/02/04 04:31 AM |
Sandy Bridge CPU article online | Nicolas Capens | 2011/02/05 08:46 PM |
Sandy Bridge CPU article online | Gabriele Svelto | 2011/02/06 06:20 AM |
Sandy Bridge CPU article online | Nicolas Capens | 2011/02/06 06:07 PM |
Sandy Bridge CPU article online | arch.comp | 2011/01/06 10:58 PM |
Sandy Bridge CPU article online | Seni | 2011/01/07 10:25 AM |
Sandy Bridge CPU article online | Michael S | 2011/01/05 04:28 AM |
Sandy Bridge CPU article online | Nicolas Capens | 2011/01/05 06:06 AM |
permuting vector elements (yet again) | hobold | 2011/01/05 05:15 PM |
permuting vector elements (yet again) | Nicolas Capens | 2011/01/06 06:11 AM |
Sandy Bridge CPU article online | Eric Bron | 2011/01/05 12:46 PM |
wow ...! | hobold | 2011/01/05 05:19 PM |
wow ...! | Nicolas Capens | 2011/01/05 06:11 PM |
wow ...! | Eric Bron | 2011/01/05 10:46 PM |
compress LUT | Eric Bron | 2011/01/05 11:05 PM |
wow ...! | Michael S | 2011/01/06 02:25 AM |
wow ...! | Nicolas Capens | 2011/01/06 06:26 AM |
wow ...! | Eric Bron | 2011/01/06 09:08 AM |
wow ...! | Nicolas Capens | 2011/01/07 07:19 AM |
wow ...! | Steve Underwood | 2011/01/07 10:53 PM |
saturation | hobold | 2011/01/08 10:25 AM |
saturation | Steve Underwood | 2011/01/08 12:38 PM |
saturation | Michael S | 2011/01/08 01:05 PM |
128 bit floats | Brett | 2011/01/08 01:39 PM |
128 bit floats | Michael S | 2011/01/08 02:10 PM |
128 bit floats | Anil Maliyekkel | 2011/01/08 03:46 PM |
128 bit floats | Kevin G | 2011/02/27 11:15 AM |
128 bit floats | hobold | 2011/02/27 04:42 PM |
128 bit floats | Ian Ollmann | 2011/02/28 04:56 PM |
OpenCL FP accuracy | hobold | 2011/03/01 06:45 AM |
OpenCL FP accuracy | anon | 2011/03/01 08:03 PM |
OpenCL FP accuracy | hobold | 2011/03/02 03:53 AM |
OpenCL FP accuracy | Eric Bron | 2011/03/02 07:10 AM |
pet project | hobold | 2011/03/02 09:22 AM |
pet project | Anon | 2011/03/02 09:10 PM |
pet project | hobold | 2011/03/03 04:57 AM |
pet project | Eric Bron | 2011/03/03 02:29 AM |
pet project | hobold | 2011/03/03 05:14 AM |
pet project | Eric Bron | 2011/03/03 03:10 PM |
pet project | hobold | 2011/03/03 04:04 PM |
OpenCL and AMD | Vincent Diepeveen | 2011/03/07 01:44 PM |
OpenCL and AMD | Eric Bron | 2011/03/08 02:05 AM |
OpenCL and AMD | Vincent Diepeveen | 2011/03/08 08:27 AM |
128 bit floats | Michael S | 2011/02/27 04:46 PM |
128 bit floats | Anil Maliyekkel | 2011/02/27 06:14 PM |
saturation | Steve Underwood | 2011/01/17 04:42 AM |
wow ...! | hobold | 2011/01/06 05:05 PM |
Ring | Moritz | 2011/01/20 10:51 PM |
Ring | Antti-Ville Tuunainen | 2011/01/21 12:25 PM |
Ring | Moritz | 2011/01/23 01:38 AM |
Ring | Michael S | 2011/01/23 04:04 AM |
So fast | Moritz | 2011/01/23 07:57 AM |
So fast | David Kanter | 2011/01/23 10:05 AM |
Sandy Bridge CPU (L1D cache) | Gordon Ward | 2011/09/09 02:47 AM |
Sandy Bridge CPU (L1D cache) | David Kanter | 2011/09/09 04:19 PM |
Sandy Bridge CPU (L1D cache) | EduardoS | 2011/09/09 08:53 PM |
Sandy Bridge CPU (L1D cache) | Paul A. Clayton | 2011/09/10 05:12 AM |
Sandy Bridge CPU (L1D cache) | Michael S | 2011/09/10 09:41 AM |
Sandy Bridge CPU (L1D cache) | EduardoS | 2011/09/10 11:17 AM |
Address Ports on Sandy Bridge Scheduler | Victor | 2011/10/16 06:40 AM |
Address Ports on Sandy Bridge Scheduler | EduardoS | 2011/10/16 07:45 PM |
Address Ports on Sandy Bridge Scheduler | Megol | 2011/10/17 09:20 AM |
Address Ports on Sandy Bridge Scheduler | Victor | 2011/10/18 05:34 PM |
Benefits of early scheduling | Paul A. Clayton | 2011/10/18 06:53 PM |
Benefits of early scheduling | Victor | 2011/10/19 05:58 PM |
Consistency and invalidation ordering | Paul A. Clayton | 2011/10/20 04:43 AM |
Address Ports on Sandy Bridge Scheduler | John Upcroft | 2011/10/21 04:16 PM |
Address Ports on Sandy Bridge Scheduler | David Kanter | 2011/10/22 10:49 AM |
Address Ports on Sandy Bridge Scheduler | John Upcroft | 2011/10/26 01:24 PM |
Store TLB look-up at commit? | Paul A. Clayton | 2011/10/26 08:30 PM |
Store TLB look-up at commit? | Richard Scott | 2011/10/26 09:40 PM |
Just a guess | Paul A. Clayton | 2011/10/27 01:54 PM |