Intel's "cripple AMD" function

Re:Intel's "cripple AMD" function by praptak on Sunday January 03, 2010 @05:17PM (#1029241)

"Only" benchmarketing? If any published benchmarks are affected by this misfeature, it's pitchforks and torches for Intel.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Intel's "cripple AMD" function by Andys on Sunday January 03, 2010 @09:40PM (#1029606)

Does it really come as news to anyone that if Intel wants to show their CPU in best light, they'll use their own compiler?

Caveat emptor.

The bulk of the x86 world uses Microsoft C++ or GCC - end of story.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Intel's "cripple AMD" function by zeugma on Monday January 04, 2010 @07:05AM (#1030199)

I disagree. ICC is often use to optimize heavy computation code. As it have a reputation of producing faster code.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Intel's "cripple AMD" function by kelnos on Monday January 04, 2010 @05:21AM (#1030100)

I think the parent was talking more about third parties doing benchmarks. If someone (not Intel) uses benchmarking software compiled with ICC, it might report erroneously bad results on an AMD system.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Intel's "cripple AMD" function by praptak on Monday January 04, 2010 @12:39PM (#1030718)

Yup, that was my point. Also, 'caveat emptor' has limits - Intel should at least state that their compiler produces suboptimal code for their competitors' CPUs.

[ Parent | on HN ]