By: Klimax (danklima.delete@this.gmail.com), March 6, 2015 12:39 pm
Room: Moderated Discussions
Brett (ggtgp.delete@this.yahoo.com) on March 6, 2015 12:57 pm wrote:
> David Kanter (dkanter.delete@this.realworldtech.com) on March 6, 2015 12:42 am wrote:
> > > A57 is definitely more than 20% faster at the same clock, as you can easily conclude
> > > from various benchmarks (eg. Geekbench shows 40% single threaded gain overall
> > > in AArch32 mode between Galaxy S5 and Galaxy S6 at the same clock).
> >
> > That's a bogus comparison since Geekbench contains lots of AES
> > stuff, and ARM64 contains special instructions for AES.
>
> Are you accusing ARM of pulling an Intel, making sure that benchmarks are dominated
> by feature X right before Intel adds feature X to the instruction set. ;)
>
> This tactic is old hat, blatantly obvious for over a decade. Happy
> to see that ARM is playing by the rules of the CPU market.
>
> > What's the speedup on GCC?
>
> GCC is the worst pointer chasing spaghetti on the planet. You have to brute force tweak hundreds
> of CPU details so as not to get burned by one of a hundred glass jaws that will cripple your
> performance. This takes billions of dollars that AMD does not have, much less tiny ARM.
>
> Unless IBM gets into the ARM64 business Intel is going to dominate the GCC comparison
> for the next two decades, longer than I expect Intel to survive as dominate company.
> $15 SOC's don't generate the sort of revenues that justify optimizing for GCC.
>
> > David
>
Where are you getting that absolute certainty that cheap-craptic SOCs will do anything against Desktop or even notebook-class CPUs by Intel? For one, those margins generally don't look to be enough to sustain such development... and second, their performance is no where near of enough. (At least not for Android)
> David Kanter (dkanter.delete@this.realworldtech.com) on March 6, 2015 12:42 am wrote:
> > > A57 is definitely more than 20% faster at the same clock, as you can easily conclude
> > > from various benchmarks (eg. Geekbench shows 40% single threaded gain overall
> > > in AArch32 mode between Galaxy S5 and Galaxy S6 at the same clock).
> >
> > That's a bogus comparison since Geekbench contains lots of AES
> > stuff, and ARM64 contains special instructions for AES.
>
> Are you accusing ARM of pulling an Intel, making sure that benchmarks are dominated
> by feature X right before Intel adds feature X to the instruction set. ;)
>
> This tactic is old hat, blatantly obvious for over a decade. Happy
> to see that ARM is playing by the rules of the CPU market.
>
> > What's the speedup on GCC?
>
> GCC is the worst pointer chasing spaghetti on the planet. You have to brute force tweak hundreds
> of CPU details so as not to get burned by one of a hundred glass jaws that will cripple your
> performance. This takes billions of dollars that AMD does not have, much less tiny ARM.
>
> Unless IBM gets into the ARM64 business Intel is going to dominate the GCC comparison
> for the next two decades, longer than I expect Intel to survive as dominate company.
> $15 SOC's don't generate the sort of revenues that justify optimizing for GCC.
>
> > David
>
Where are you getting that absolute certainty that cheap-craptic SOCs will do anything against Desktop or even notebook-class CPUs by Intel? For one, those margins generally don't look to be enough to sustain such development... and second, their performance is no where near of enough. (At least not for Android)