91–100 of 156 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They were also the first to produce an x86 CPU with an integrated northbridge, they could have pitched it more at embedded and industrial markets where SPEC scores are less important.
They did! There are many transmeta powered thin clients for example.
I liked the Transmeta web page from before they launched. It was just bare HTML with no styling. It said: This page is not here yet. The product hype and lack of knowledge about what it was meant that nobody knew what to expect. In these hyped expectations, and with Torvalds on board, everyone expected that everything would be different. But it wasn't. A similar product launch was the Segway, where we went from this…
> A similar product launch was the Segway, where we went from this incredible vision of everyone on Segways to nobody wanting one. The problem with Segway in Germany was rather the certification for road traffic. Because of the insane red tape involved, the introduction was delayed, and for the same reason nobody thus wanted one.
They were a complete hype product, their projections that they would essentially replace walking and pushbikes were just crazy. I don't think I know anyone who wanted one for more than as a toy.
As a side note, at a ee department where I was teaching around 10 years ago, one student build one as his final year project. Pretty awesome, he essentially did everything himself from software to all the mechanics/electronics... Worked very well as well.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Thank you for sharing! > Fixed guest branches just get turned into host branches and work like normal. How does that work in case of self-modifying code, or skewed execution (where the same x86 instruction stream has two totally different interpretations based on what offset you start at)?
Skewed execution are just different traces. Basic blocks don't have a requirement that they don't partially overlap with other basic blocks. You want that anyway for optimization reasons even without skewed execution. Self modifying code is handled with MMU traps on the writes, and invalidation of the relevant traces. It is very much a slow path though. Ideally heavy self modfying code is able to stay in the interpre…
This might end up having a bad time running JavaScript VM JITed code, which self-modifies a lot.
But all of that makes sense! Thanks!
Transmeta made a technology bet that dynamic compilation could beat OOO super scalar CPUs in SPEC. It was wrong, but it was controversial among experts at the time. I’m glad that they tried it even though it turned out to be wrong. Many of the lessons learned are documented in systems conferences and incorporated into modern designs, ie GPUs. To me transmeta is a great example of a venture investment. If it would hav…
I was an intel cpu architect when transmeta started making claims. We were baffled by those claims. We were pushing the limit of our pipelines to get incremental gains and they were claiming to beat a dedicated arch on the fly! None of their claims made sense to ANYONE with a shred of cpu arch experience. I think your summary has rose colored lenses, or reflects the layman’s perspective.
I wonder how long before we try it again.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I was an intel cpu architect when transmeta started making claims. We were baffled by those claims. We were pushing the limit of our pipelines to get incremental gains and they were claiming to beat a dedicated arch on the fly! None of their claims made sense to ANYONE with a shred of cpu arch experience. I think your summary has rose colored lenses, or reflects the layman’s perspective.
I think this is a classic hill-climbing dilemma. If you start in the same place, and one org has worked very hard and spent a lot of money optimizing the system, they will probably come out on top. But if you start in a different place, reimagining the problem from first principles, you may or may not find yourself with a taller hill to climb. Decisions made very early on in your hill-climbing process lock you in to…
With blackjack, and hookers!
https://www.computerworld.com/article/1565866/intel-settles-...
Transmeta made a technology bet that dynamic compilation could beat OOO super scalar CPUs in SPEC. It was wrong, but it was controversial among experts at the time. I’m glad that they tried it even though it turned out to be wrong. Many of the lessons learned are documented in systems conferences and incorporated into modern designs, ie GPUs. To me transmeta is a great example of a venture investment. If it would hav…
I think more about the timing being incorrect - betting on software in an era of exponential hardware growth was unwise (software performance can’t scale that way). The problem is that you need to marry it with a significantly better CPU/architecture because the JIT is about not losing performance while retaining back compat. However, if you add it onto a better CPU it’s a fine technique to bet on - case in point App…
TSMC seems to have made a lot of bones on Arm and Apple’s time.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think more about the timing being incorrect - betting on software in an era of exponential hardware growth was unwise (software performance can’t scale that way). The problem is that you need to marry it with a significantly better CPU/architecture because the JIT is about not losing performance while retaining back compat. However, if you add it onto a better CPU it’s a fine technique to bet on - case in point App…
> However, if you add it onto a better CPU it’s a fine technique to bet on - case in point Apple’s move away from Intel onto homegrown CPUs. I don't think Apple is a good example here. Arm was extremely well-established when Apple began its own phone/tablet CPU designs. By the time Macs began to transition, much of their developer ecosystem was already familiar. Apple's CPUs are actually notably conservative when com…
Transmeta’s CPU was not performance competitive and thus had no path to success.
And as for Apple itself, they had built the first iPhone on top of ARM to begin with (partially because Intel didn’t see a market). So they were already familiar with ARM before they even started building ARM CPUs. But also the developer ecosystem familiarity is only partially relevant - even in compat mode the M1 ran faster than equivalent contemporary Intel chips. So the familiarity was only needed to unlock the full potential (most of which was done by Apple porting 1p software). But even if they had never switched on ARM support in the M1 the JIT technique (compiled with a better CPU and better unified memory architecture) would still have been fast enough to slightly outcompete Intel chips on performance and battery life - native software just made it 0 competition.
Transmeta made a technology bet that dynamic compilation could beat OOO super scalar CPUs in SPEC. It was wrong, but it was controversial among experts at the time. I’m glad that they tried it even though it turned out to be wrong. Many of the lessons learned are documented in systems conferences and incorporated into modern designs, ie GPUs. To me transmeta is a great example of a venture investment. If it would hav…
That's kind of the bet they made, but misses a key point. Their fundamental idea was that by having simpler CPUs, they could iterate on Moore's law more quickly. And eventually they would win on performance. Not just on a few speculative edge cases, but overall. The dynamic compilation was needed to be able to run existing software on it. The first iterations, of course, would be slower. And so their initial market,…
Perhaps they would have been better off building the decode logic as programmable by making effectively a multicore machine where the translation code ran on its own processor with its own cache, instead of a pure JIT.
> so IBM handled manufacturing of its first-generation CPUs. I'm curious: Is there a consensus on which startup companies achieved success using IBM as a fab? or if not a consensus, I'd settle for anecdotes too. My own company (which built 40G optical transponders) used them back in that era. While the tech was first rate, the pricing was something to behold.