Re:Intel discontinues pathfinder for RISC-V program
by adgjlsfhk1 on Friday January 27, 2023 @04:05PM
(#34551850)
there still is the fundamental problem that most people who do compiler work mostly don't work on servers so Intel's strategy has kept avx 512 from having good support
Re:Intel discontinues pathfinder for RISC-V program
by imtringued on Saturday January 28, 2023 @10:09AM
(#34558120)
I think the biggest issue is that auto vectorization would need a programming language that is designed around it.
Vectorization is a niche but GPU programming isn't (shader programming is very popular).
Re:Intel discontinues pathfinder for RISC-V program
by CoastalCoder on Monday January 30, 2023 @01:24AM
(#34576459)
> I think the biggest issue is that auto vectorization would need a programming language that is designed around it.
I don't think that's correct.
The compilers I work with do a pretty decent job of auto-vectorizing the inner-most loops of an algorithm, especially if they know the loop bounds at compile-time.
If you look at AVX-512's chart on Wikipedia[0], but reorder it into (the discontinued) Xeon Phi, server, and consumer tiers, it's a nice chart showing increasing support as time goes on. For example, -ER, -PF, -4FMAPS, and -4VNNIW weren't really "removed" after Xeon Phi because the server and consumer lines never had them. That chart is just horrible because it tries to show a timeline without clarifying the differences in tiers.
[0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AVX-512#CPUs_with_AVX-512