Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

21 GB/s CSV Parsing Using SIMD on AMD 9950X

nietras.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 176 posts

Re: 21 GB/s CSV Parsing Using SIMD on AMD 9950X

#81

Post by knowitnone »

sitkack wrote: post #70
sheepscreek wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> They continue to do this thing where they do a huge push into a new technology, then don't see the uptake and let it die. Except Intel deliberately made AVX 512 a feature exclusively available to Xeon and enterprise processors in future generations. This backward step artificially limits its availability, forcing enterprises to invest in more expensive hardware. I wonder if Intel has taken a similar approach with A…

They go out their way to segment their markets, ECC, AVX, Optane support (only specific server class skus). I hate it, I hate as a home pc user, I hate it as an enterprise customer, I hate as a shareholder.

Every company does this. If you're grandma only uses a web browser, word processor, and excel, does she really want to spend an additional $50 on a feature she'll not use? Same with NPUs. Different consumers want different features for different prices.

Re: 21 GB/s CSV Parsing Using SIMD on AMD 9950X

#82

Post by kyboren »

paddy_m wrote: post #74
sitkack wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Itanium worked as intended.

So far as killing HP PA-Risc, SGI MIPS, DEC Alpha, and seriously hurting the chance for adoption of Sparc, and POWER outside of their respective parents (did I miss any)? Thing is, they could have killed it by 1998, without ever releasing anything, that would have killed the other architectures it was trying to compete with. Instead they waited until 2020 to end support. What the VLIW of Itanium needed and never real…

> What the VLIW of Itanium needed and never really got was proper compiler support.

This is kinda under-selling it. The fundamental problem with statically-scheduled VLIW machines like Itanium is it puts all of the complexity in the compiler. Unfortunately it turns out it's just really hard to make a good static scheduler!

In contrast, dynamically-scheduled out-of-order superscalar machines work great but put all the complexity in silicon. The transistor overhead was expensive back in the day, so statically-scheduled VLIWs seemed like a good idea.

What happened was that static scheduling stayed really hard while the transistor overhead for dynamic scheduling became irrelevantly cheap. "Throw more hardware at it" won handily over "Make better software".

Re: 21 GB/s CSV Parsing Using SIMD on AMD 9950X

#83

Post by Gud »

sitkack wrote: post #49
chao- wrote: post #38

It feels crazy to me that Intel spent years dedicating die space on consumer SKUs to "make fetch happen" with AVX-512, and as more and more libraries are finally using it, as Intel's goal is achieved, they have removed AVX-512 from their consumer SKUs. It isn't that AMD has better AVX-512 support, which would be an impressive upset on it's own. Instead, it is only that AMD has AVX-512 on consumer CPUs, because Intel…

That is what Intel does, they build up a market (Optane) and then do a rug pull (Depth Cameras). They continue to do this thing where they do a huge push into a new technology, then don't see the uptake and let it die. Instead of building slowly and then at the right time, doing a big push. Optane support was just getting mature in the Linux kernel when they pulled it. And they focused on some weird cost cutting move…

Indeed. Octane/3dxpoint was mind blowing futuristic stuff but it was just gone after 5 years? On the market? Talk about short sighted.

Re: 21 GB/s CSV Parsing Using SIMD on AMD 9950X

#85

Post by tliltocatl »

knowitnone wrote: post #81
sitkack wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They go out their way to segment their markets, ECC, AVX, Optane support (only specific server class skus). I hate it, I hate as a home pc user, I hate it as an enterprise customer, I hate as a shareholder.

Every company does this. If you're grandma only uses a web browser, word processor, and excel, does she really want to spend an additional $50 on a feature she'll not use? Same with NPUs. Different consumers want different features for different prices.

Except it hinders adoption, because not having a feature in entry-level products will mean less incentive (and ability) for software developers to use it. Compatibility is so valuable it makes everyone converge on the least common denominator, so when you price-gouge on a software-exposed feature, you might as well bury this feature altogether.

Re: 21 GB/s CSV Parsing Using SIMD on AMD 9950X

#86

Post by tedunangst »

chao- wrote: post #38

It feels crazy to me that Intel spent years dedicating die space on consumer SKUs to "make fetch happen" with AVX-512, and as more and more libraries are finally using it, as Intel's goal is achieved, they have removed AVX-512 from their consumer SKUs. It isn't that AMD has better AVX-512 support, which would be an impressive upset on it's own. Instead, it is only that AMD has AVX-512 on consumer CPUs, because Intel…

I mean, the most interesting part of the article for me:

> A bit surprisingly the AVX2 parser on 9950X hit ~20GB/s! That is, it was better than the AVX-512 based parser by ~10%, which is pretty significant for Sep.

They fixed it, that's the whole point, but I think there's evidence that AVX-512 doesn't actually benefit consumers that much. I would be willing to settle for a laptop that can only parse 20GB/s and not 21GB/s of CSV. I think vector assembly nerds care about support much more than users.

Re: 21 GB/s CSV Parsing Using SIMD on AMD 9950X

#87

Post by bri3d »

kyboren wrote: post #82
paddy_m wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So far as killing HP PA-Risc, SGI MIPS, DEC Alpha, and seriously hurting the chance for adoption of Sparc, and POWER outside of their respective parents (did I miss any)? Thing is, they could have killed it by 1998, without ever releasing anything, that would have killed the other architectures it was trying to compete with. Instead they waited until 2020 to end support. What the VLIW of Itanium needed and never real…

> What the VLIW of Itanium needed and never really got was proper compiler support. This is kinda under-selling it. The fundamental problem with statically-scheduled VLIW machines like Itanium is it puts all of the complexity in the compiler. Unfortunately it turns out it's just really hard to make a good static scheduler! In contrast, dynamically-scheduled out-of-order superscalar machines work great but put all the…

No, VLIW is even worse than this. Describing it as a compiler problem undersells the issue. VLIW is not tractable for a multitasking / multi tenant system due to cache residency issues. The compiler cannot efficiently schedule instructions without knowing what is in cache. But, it can’t know what’s going to be in cache if it doesn’t know what’s occupying the adjacent task time slices. Add virtualization and it’s a disaster.

Re: 21 GB/s CSV Parsing Using SIMD on AMD 9950X

#88

Post by gnfargbl »

sitkack wrote: post #49
chao- wrote: post #38

It feels crazy to me that Intel spent years dedicating die space on consumer SKUs to "make fetch happen" with AVX-512, and as more and more libraries are finally using it, as Intel's goal is achieved, they have removed AVX-512 from their consumer SKUs. It isn't that AMD has better AVX-512 support, which would be an impressive upset on it's own. Instead, it is only that AMD has AVX-512 on consumer CPUs, because Intel…

That is what Intel does, they build up a market (Optane) and then do a rug pull (Depth Cameras). They continue to do this thing where they do a huge push into a new technology, then don't see the uptake and let it die. Instead of building slowly and then at the right time, doing a big push. Optane support was just getting mature in the Linux kernel when they pulled it. And they focused on some weird cost cutting move…

The rugpull on Optane was incredibly frustrating. Intel developed a technology which made really meaningful improvements to workloads in an industry that is full of sticky late adopters (RDBMSes). They kept investing until the point where they had unequivocally made their point and the late adopters were just about getting it... and then killed it!

It's hard to understand how they could have played that particular hand more badly. Even a few years on, I'm missing Optane drives because there is still no functional alternative. If they just held out a bit longer, they would have created a set of enterprise customers who would still be buying the things in 2040.

Re: 21 GB/s CSV Parsing Using SIMD on AMD 9950X

#89

Post by Remnant44 »

g-mork wrote: post #10
WD-42 wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yea wtf is that chart, it literally skips 4 cpu generations where it shows “massive performance gain”. Straight to the trash with this post.

It also appears to be reporting whole-CPU vs. single thread, 1.3 GB/sec is not impressive for single thread perf

I mean... A single 9950x core is going to struggle to do more than 16 GB/second of direct mem copy bandwidth. So being within an order of magnitude of that seems reasonable

Re: 21 GB/s CSV Parsing Using SIMD on AMD 9950X

#90

Post by FpUser »

sitkack wrote: post #49
chao- wrote: post #38

It feels crazy to me that Intel spent years dedicating die space on consumer SKUs to "make fetch happen" with AVX-512, and as more and more libraries are finally using it, as Intel's goal is achieved, they have removed AVX-512 from their consumer SKUs. It isn't that AMD has better AVX-512 support, which would be an impressive upset on it's own. Instead, it is only that AMD has AVX-512 on consumer CPUs, because Intel…

That is what Intel does, they build up a market (Optane) and then do a rug pull (Depth Cameras). They continue to do this thing where they do a huge push into a new technology, then don't see the uptake and let it die. Instead of building slowly and then at the right time, doing a big push. Optane support was just getting mature in the Linux kernel when they pulled it. And they focused on some weird cost cutting move…

I am very disappointed about Optane drives. Perfect case for superfast vertically scalable database. I was going to build a solution based on this but suddenly it is gone for all practical intents and purposes.
Post reply on HN