Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Google Engineers Are Becoming Concerned Over Some Arm Platforms Lacking Spectre V2 Mitigations

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #41
    Originally posted by zyxxel View Post

    I'd say you seem to be completely failing at keeping up a debate. Now try a better response where you actually argue.

    Hint here - there are more than one factor needed to make a good processor. So a good chief designer is one important factor. But that isn't mutually exclusive from having a very large walled needed to finance the work. And the current market situation affects the ability to be allowed to invest that huge amount of money.
    I honestly couldn't care less about convincing someone like you.

    What's happening is that you don't understand microarchitecture (maybe you think you do, but you really don't). So you pull the discussion in a direction that you do understand. But, but, but, what about this? It really doesn't make your points valid.

    First chapter of H&P tells you about what determines the runtime of a simple process - a trivial equation involving instruction count, IPC, and clock cycle of the processor.

    Well, we live in a time where clock frequencies don't really change that much, and even instruction counts between different architectures don't vary that much. What's left is the IPC, which is the big elephant in the room. And yes, over there the difference between something like a Raspberry Pi and a lowly Pentium Gold is remarkable. Because of the microarchitecture, even a Pentium Gold can sustain much higher instruction throughputs than a RPi.

    The thing is - it's difficult to understand microarchitecture, so all the BSers focus on details that they can understand, things that are described with simple numbers.

    While I don't think you will, you really should read H&P.

    And, FWIW, I have a PhD in the topic with research work cited in microprocessor patents.

    Comment


    • #42
      Originally posted by vladpetric View Post

      I honestly couldn't care less about convincing someone like you.

      What's happening is that you don't understand microarchitecture (maybe you think you do, but you really don't). So you pull the discussion in a direction that you do understand. But, but, but, what about this? It really doesn't make your points valid.

      First chapter of H&P tells you about what determines the runtime of a simple process - a trivial equation involving instruction count, IPC, and clock cycle of the processor.

      Well, we live in a time where clock frequencies don't really change that much, and even instruction counts between different architectures don't vary that much. What's left is the IPC, which is the big elephant in the room. And yes, over there the difference between something like a Raspberry Pi and a lowly Pentium Gold is remarkable. Because of the microarchitecture, even a Pentium Gold can sustain much higher instruction throughputs than a RPi.

      The thing is - it's difficult to understand microarchitecture, so all the BSers focus on details that they can understand, things that are described with simple numbers.

      While I don't think you will, you really should read H&P.

      And, FWIW, I have a PhD in the topic with research work cited in microprocessor patents.
      What I do know is that you post bull. You have zero information about what I do - or do not - know. But that doesn't stop you from crapping in the thread.

      And you still failed to understand that if I add one point that is important, that doesn't invalidate the list of other important points that must be fulfilled to develop a great chip. That's on you to work on.

      Another thing - your "trival equation" isn't that trivial unless we are talking about trivial processors. Because non-trivial processors doesn't process a fixed number of instructions per second. So IPC isn't a fixed value.

      Id'd say you have a PhD in failing to debate, which means your posts unproductive. Something to work on - maybe it's an IPC problem?

      Comment


      • #43
        Originally posted by zyxxel View Post

        What I do know is that you post bull. You have zero information about what I do - or do not - know. But that doesn't stop you from crapping in the thread.

        And you still failed to understand that if I add one point that is important, that doesn't invalidate the list of other important points that must be fulfilled to develop a great chip. That's on you to work on.

        Another thing - your "trival equation" isn't that trivial unless we are talking about trivial processors. Because non-trivial processors doesn't process a fixed number of instructions per second. So IPC isn't a fixed value.

        Id'd say you have a PhD in failing to debate, which means your posts unproductive. Something to work on - maybe it's an IPC problem?
        Nowhere did I claim that IPC is a fixed value - no architect worth their salt would say that IPC is a fixed value. The equation is trivial, not the stuff behind it. The point of that equation, particularly in current times, is to highlight how important IPC is.

        Just read H&P and maybe take an architecture class. Again, you think you know stuff, but you don't. Based on the discussion I have some pretty good idea about how little you know about the topic, actually (but there's Dunning-Kruger, of course).

        Comment


        • #44
          Originally posted by vladpetric View Post

          Nowhere did I claim that IPC is a fixed value - no architect worth their salt would say that IPC is a fixed value. The equation is trivial, not the stuff behind it. The point of that equation, particularly in current times, is to highlight how important IPC is.

          Just read H&P and maybe take an architecture class. Again, you think you know stuff, but you don't. Based on the discussion I have some pretty good idea about how little you know about the topic, actually (but there's Dunning-Kruger, of course).
          Yes. And you need to work up on your Dunning-Kruger. With your ability to debate here, there is no way in hell you can defend a thesis.

          Comment

          Working...
          X