By: none (none.delete@this.none.com), February 2, 2013 5:33 am
Room: Moderated Discussions
Patrick Chase (patrickjchase.delete@this.gmail.com) on February 1, 2013 10:11 pm wrote:
[...]
> [*] Yes, I do realize that the A9 is OoO. It's capabilities in that regard are so limited that one wonders
> why they bothered, though. Embedded workloads are typically recompiled and optimized for each product and often
> use explicit prefetch to "expose" cache misses, and both of those tend to reduce the advantage of OoO.
Perhaps they bothered because even limited OoO brought ~20% performance over A8 for a very low cost? Also A9 is used in environments where recompilation doesn't happen in case you didn't notice ;)
[...]
> [*] Yes, I do realize that the A9 is OoO. It's capabilities in that regard are so limited that one wonders
> why they bothered, though. Embedded workloads are typically recompiled and optimized for each product and often
> use explicit prefetch to "expose" cache misses, and both of those tend to reduce the advantage of OoO.
Perhaps they bothered because even limited OoO brought ~20% performance over A8 for a very low cost? Also A9 is used in environments where recompilation doesn't happen in case you didn't notice ;)
