By: anon (anon.delete@this.anon.com), July 13, 2015 7:46 am
Room: Moderated Discussions
anon (anon.delete@this.anon.com) on July 12, 2015 7:42 pm wrote:
> I think you give less credit than they deserve. POWER designers for example would surely be looking
> at x86 performance and determining where they can improve. Their own mainframe designers actually
> implement x86-like ordering presumably with relatively good performance. Not that they are necessarily
> all the same people working on both lines, but at least you know patents would not get in the way
> of borrowing ideas there. They've been following somewhat similar paths as Intel designers have in
> this regard, reducing cost of barriers, implementing store address speculation, etc.
>
Shouldn't that be the x86 designers implement a mainframe like ordering? Many people here seem to think Intel invented multiprocessing.
> I think you give less credit than they deserve. POWER designers for example would surely be looking
> at x86 performance and determining where they can improve. Their own mainframe designers actually
> implement x86-like ordering presumably with relatively good performance. Not that they are necessarily
> all the same people working on both lines, but at least you know patents would not get in the way
> of borrowing ideas there. They've been following somewhat similar paths as Intel designers have in
> this regard, reducing cost of barriers, implementing store address speculation, etc.
>
Shouldn't that be the x86 designers implement a mainframe like ordering? Many people here seem to think Intel invented multiprocessing.
