By: David Kanter (dkanter.delete@this.realworldtech.com), June 22, 2008 10:36 am
Room: Moderated Discussions
Michael S (already5chosen@yahoo.com) on 6/22/08 wrote:
>Doesn't Intel Merom line have unified physical register file for GP, x87/MMX and XMM registers?
>If it does then they have 40 "architected" registers per thread per regfile - 8
>more than IBM power4/5 that IFAIR keeps separate register files for GP and FP registers
>and has no Altivec registers at all.
Also, the reason that the P6 has a big register file is that the register file is rarely used an operand source. I've talked a bit with Andy Glew about this, and he's pretty insistent that in a P6-style microarchitecture, the vast majority of your input operands come from the forwarding network, rather than the physical register file itself.
I'm not sure if that's true of a P4 or K8 style microarchitecture. I believe the POWER4/5 is closest to the K8 from a microarchitectural perspective. I'm not quite sure how to classify the POWER6 yet...
I also don't recall the microarchitecture for OOO that the EV8 was going to use. I definitely recall it being unified and more sensible than the EV6/7, which used more CAMs than it needed to.
DK
>Doesn't Intel Merom line have unified physical register file for GP, x87/MMX and XMM registers?
>If it does then they have 40 "architected" registers per thread per regfile - 8
>more than IBM power4/5 that IFAIR keeps separate register files for GP and FP registers
>and has no Altivec registers at all.
Also, the reason that the P6 has a big register file is that the register file is rarely used an operand source. I've talked a bit with Andy Glew about this, and he's pretty insistent that in a P6-style microarchitecture, the vast majority of your input operands come from the forwarding network, rather than the physical register file itself.
I'm not sure if that's true of a P4 or K8 style microarchitecture. I believe the POWER4/5 is closest to the K8 from a microarchitectural perspective. I'm not quite sure how to classify the POWER6 yet...
I also don't recall the microarchitecture for OOO that the EV8 was going to use. I definitely recall it being unified and more sensible than the EV6/7, which used more CAMs than it needed to.
DK
Topic | Posted By | Date |
---|---|---|
Intel AVX kills AMD SSE5 | Agner | 2008/06/17 08:14 AM |
Intel AVX kills AMD SSE5 | a reader | 2008/06/17 09:03 AM |
Bulldozer? | David Kanter | 2008/06/19 04:23 PM |
Bulldozer? | EduardoS | 2008/06/19 06:11 PM |
Bulldozer? | Max | 2008/06/19 06:16 PM |
Bulldozer? | Goose | 2008/06/21 02:23 AM |
Bulldozer? | David Kanter | 2008/06/21 07:37 AM |
Bulldozer? | someone | 2008/06/21 07:55 AM |
Bulldozer? | David Kanter | 2008/06/21 08:07 AM |
Bulldozer? | S. Rao | 2008/06/21 11:08 AM |
Regfiles | Peter | 2008/06/21 11:49 AM |
Bulldozer? | Linus Torvalds | 2008/06/21 12:23 PM |
Bulldozer? | S. Rao | 2008/06/21 04:50 PM |
unified physical register file nullifies x86 advantage | Michael S | 2008/06/22 12:24 AM |
unified physical register file nullifies x86 advantage | David Kanter | 2008/06/22 09:35 AM |
unified physical register file nullifies x86 advantage | hobold | 2008/06/22 01:03 PM |
Reg file vs. forwarding network | David Kanter | 2008/06/22 10:36 AM |
Reg file vs. forwarding network | hobold | 2008/06/22 12:39 PM |
Reg file vs. forwarding network | Peter | 2008/06/22 02:48 PM |
Reg file vs. forwarding network | David Kanter | 2008/06/22 08:54 PM |
Reg file vs. forwarding network | Peter | 2008/06/23 03:44 AM |
Reg file vs. forwarding network | savantu | 2008/06/23 04:41 AM |
Reg file vs. forwarding network | Peter | 2008/06/23 07:35 AM |
Reg file vs. forwarding network | Anders Jensen | 2008/06/23 11:05 AM |
Reg file vs. forwarding network | left nutz | 2008/06/27 07:31 AM |
Intel AVX kills AMD SSE5 | nobat | 2008/06/21 11:23 AM |
Intel AVX kills AMD SSE5 | Agner | 2008/06/21 10:01 PM |
So... | Dean Kent | 2008/06/22 07:35 AM |
SSE5 has a great chance to succeed. | mpx | 2008/06/22 12:25 AM |
SSE5 has a great chance to succeed. | Michael S | 2008/06/22 01:42 AM |
SSE5 has a great chance for fiasco | Agner | 2008/06/22 03:32 AM |
SSE5 has a great chance for fiasco | Ian Ameline | 2008/06/22 08:37 AM |
SSE5 has a great chance for fiasco | anonymous | 2008/06/22 09:02 AM |
SSE5 has a great chance for fiasco | hobold | 2008/06/22 12:59 PM |
SSE5 has a great chance for fiasco | Howard Chu | 2008/06/22 04:38 PM |
SSE5 has a great chance to succeed. | hobold | 2008/06/22 12:52 PM |
SSE5 has a great chance to succeed. | Michael S | 2008/06/22 01:46 PM |
SSE5 has a great chance to succeed. | Hannes | 2008/06/24 08:49 AM |
SSE5 has a great chance to succeed. | anonymous | 2008/06/24 10:46 AM |
SSE5 has a great chance to succeed. | Ian Ollmann | 2008/06/24 10:12 PM |