News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:M1 Ultra Geekbench Score by wmf on Tuesday March 08, 2022 @08:00PM (#30609696)
L1 hasn't been a single cycle for a long time, like decades.
Re:M1 Ultra Geekbench Score by actuator on Tuesday March 08, 2022 @08:10PM (#30609778)
Hmm, thanks; that seems interesting. I guess I need to read up more. On searching in Google someone[1] was quoting Xeon L1 fetch as approximately 4 cycles. I don't know if this is an average across branch prediction hit/miss, I will look for source of these numbers and try to read what has changed.

[1] https://stackoverflow.com/a/4087331

Re:M1 Ultra Geekbench Score by moonchild on Wednesday March 09, 2022 @01:45AM (#30611601)
Yes, 4-5 cycles is to be expected. Also, larger caches generally trade off latency, so I would not be surprised if apple's chips were slower still.
Re:M1 Ultra Geekbench Score by 95014_refugee on Wednesday March 09, 2022 @11:19AM (#30616207)
The cycle count is largely irrelevant in a speculative, pipelined core, as long as it can speculate far enough ahead that the delay is masked by other activity. 4-5 cycles is nothing in the scheme of things.
Re:M1 Ultra Geekbench Score by moonchild on Wednesday March 09, 2022 @04:44PM (#30620426)
Emphasis on 'largely'. If you have e.g. multiply indirect pointers, then you care. That said, I didn't mean to imply that moving to bigger, slower caches was the wrong tradeoff.
Re:M1 Ultra Geekbench Score by hajile on Wednesday March 09, 2022 @12:50PM (#30617696)
This is part of what makes Apple's design so incredible. Normally, increasing the cache size dramatically increases latency, but they paid the cost and their 128kb D-cache and 196kb I-cache still retain 2-3 cycles of latency.