121–130 of 328 posts
Interesting to see the same fundamental issue at the nano scale...
Put another way: if AMD (and especially Intel) don't do something about this they're going to get completely eaten alive by ARM. The amount of processing power available in a modern smartphone is truly mind-boggling. I'd love to see a chart showing the chip cost and energy cost of the power on an M1 chip in each previou syear. I would guess that 30+ years ago you'd be in the millions of dollars and watts of power but…
In my experience talking to semiconductors folks, ARM is just not a concern anymore. The future is RISC-V, and ARM is already being seen as legacy tech. ARM's progress in the server space has stalled, the ARM Windows ecosystem is dead, Android has laid the groundwork for a move to RISC-V, and ARM has never and will never touch the desktop market.
Most, if not all SemiCoductor “folks” I know are very pragmatic. As in how a Real Engineer should be, unlike software engineers. And in my experience, only HN and the Internet are suggesting ARM is dead. Everything will be RISC-V.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
> It proves my point beautifully when the only response to my comment Your comment was beyond ignorant, and wrong. Most folks here are too smart, or busy, to reply to such nonsense. I am neither. ARM is by far the most shipped and used arch every year. AMZ is even going in heavier on it. It's not legacy tech at all. So a person decided to show you how wrong you were, by listing what's probably the most impressive chi…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>The future is RISC-V I hope this never comes to pass, because a RISC-V future is a Chinese future. A Chinese future will not be kind to western ideals that most of us hold dear.
Huh? China has licenses for both the x86_64 and ARM ISAs. WhT about RISC-V makes it an advantage for Chinese companies?
Now, yes, China will just espionage and kangaroo court their way through and around such legalities anyway, but nonetheless RISC-V is less effort for more reward for China if it becomes at least on par with x86 and ARM.
Put more basically, it's a matter of national security. China can have an entire RISC-V ecosystem indigenously, unlike x86 and ARM.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>The future is RISC-V I hope this never comes to pass, because a RISC-V future is a Chinese future. A Chinese future will not be kind to western ideals that most of us hold dear.
Huh? China has licenses for both the x86_64 and ARM ISAs. WhT about RISC-V makes it an advantage for Chinese companies?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think because general compute is hard to parallelize, so 256 cores doesn't help much in practice. (Compute that does parallelize well already runs on GPU).
I get that hugely parallel applications already run on the gpu, but wouldn't something like 4 power and 28 efficiency cores kinda make sense?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> The Nvidia 4090 turned out to be far ahead of the AMD 7900XTX. 7900XTX is on par or better than 4090 in alot of games, as well as some games favouring nvidia more than amd... (obviously not talking about Ray Tracing) Coupled with a lower price... I'm not quite sure what you're talking about since you're saying the oppisite is all reviews I've seen.
You sure? 7900 is probably better value but the 4090 outperforms it by at least 20% in games.
@ 4k gaming then 4090 on average is /much/ better than the 7900xtx, but looking at 1080/1440p that lead deminishes alot.
edit: At the end of the day tho its all too damn expensive now.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
People keep repeating that Zen4 and M1 are close in efficiency but what is the source with actual benchmarks and power measurements? At any rate, using single points to compare energy efficiency isn't a good comparison, unless either the performance or power consumption of the data points comparable. Like, the M1's little cores are 3-5x even more efficient when operating in an incomparable power class, and Apple's ow…
Generally you see this in the lower class chips that aren’t overclocked to within an inch of instability. It’s not uncommon to see a chip that uses 200w to perform 10% worse at 100w, or 20% worse at 70w. I can’t be bothered to chase down an actual comparison, but usually you’ll see something along those lines if you compare the benchmarks for the top tier chip with a slightly lower tier 65w equivalent.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes WSL2
while WSL2 is great for what it is it just doesn't compare to working in a linux distro. there are a lot of pain points where external tools wont always work well with WSL. I also like the productivity customizations posseble in Linux while the same are difficult or impossible on Windows. of course if your work is tied into the windows eco system having WSL is good to have.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you take a Zen 3 running at optimal clocks for efficiency (such as the 5800U) the difference between its computing performance per watt is competitive with the M1 if you account for the difference in node size (which TSMC claims gives 30% less power consumption at the same performance). As the article points out, the real efficiency gains will be domain specific changes such as shifting to 8 bit for more calculati…
How would x86-64 be as efficient with the same transistor & power budget when they have to run an extra decoder and ring within that budget? Seems physically impossible.