News Intel and AMD forge x86 ecosystem advisory group that aims to ensure a unified ISA moving forward

Admin

Administrator
Staff member

bit_user

Titan
Ambassador
It's a little hard to see what's in this for Intel, but my best guess is that they caught flak from big customers for reversing course on AVX-512 and doing AVX10.

Also, if they want to stave off the assault from ARM and RISC-V, then there's an incentive for getting these ISA extensions deployed and utilized in the field, on a more aggressive time table. Having a situation where AMD drags its feet on a certain ISA extension could mean that software developers are less likely to utilize it, and that ultimately hurts Intel and undermines the point of even having the extension.

The article said:
Intel and AMD are the only two primary x86 architecture licensees that build new processors in high volumes, creating a duopoly.
VIA is another licensee and has been engaged with Zhaoxin to design and build new x86 CPUs. Given the potential size of the Chinese market, I think they might qualify as high-volume.
 
Last edited:

Kamen Rider Blade

Distinguished
Dec 2, 2013
1,341
864
20,060
Maybe we can get Intel to allow AMD in on the ATX Spec.

There are a few things I want to modify as well.

First, we need to get rid of 12VHPWR & 12v-2x6 and kill it.

Start over from scratch to make a BETTER/SAFER High Wattage Plug.

The current plug is just badly architected with not enough safety margin from the outset.

Also, the Backside mounted MoBo Connectors are dumb.

We need to nip that in the bud.

We need "Right-Angle Receptacles & Plugs to become the standard.

We also need to bring back all our PCIe Rear Add-In slots.

M.2 Connectors can be adapted to PCIe slots, not the other way around.

Don't allow MoBo makers to force M.2 Connectors by default on the MoBo to eat away our PCIe slots.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: rluker5

ekio

Reputable
Mar 24, 2021
111
133
4,760
Amd and Intel KNOW x86 is a dead technology that is kept alive through bandaids and they know their value is bound to keeping it alive as long as they can.

The healthy way of moving on would be to embrace arm or risc-v with advanced x86 to modern isa software translators for the transition phase, but that would mean the end of the duopole…
 
  • Like
Reactions: coolitic

Kamen Rider Blade

Distinguished
Dec 2, 2013
1,341
864
20,060
Amd and Intel KNOW x86 is a dead technology that is kept alive through bandaids and they know their value is bound to keeping it alive as sling as they can.

The healthy way of moving on would be to embrace arm or risc-v with advanced x86 to modern isa software translators, but that would mean the end of the duopole…
x86 is 4 Life! & 4 EVAR!

But in all seriousness:

The ARM vs x86 debate largely doesn't matter. It's outdated.
Conclusion: Implementation Matters, not ISA

Jim Keller agrees that the ISA doesn't really matter either
 
  • Like
Reactions: rluker5

Kamen Rider Blade

Distinguished
Dec 2, 2013
1,341
864
20,060
Amd and Intel KNOW x86 is a dead technology that is kept alive through bandaids and they know their value is bound to keeping it alive as long as they can.

The healthy way of moving on would be to embrace arm or risc-v with advanced x86 to modern isa software translators for the transition phase, but that would mean the end of the duopole…
What we need is for nVIDIA & Qualcomm to be allowed to buy x86 Licenses and join the x86 Family of CPU makers.
 

bit_user

Titan
Ambassador
But in all seriousness:

The ARM vs x86 debate largely doesn't matter. It's outdated.
I have a lot of respect for most of what they publish, but the author clearly didn't do his research, as he wasn't even aware of APX.

Jim Keller agrees that the ISA doesn't really matter either
I think he's been out of the game, for too long. Either that, or he felt it would be uncouth to undercut his former employers (AMD and Intel), if he started badmouthing their ISA. But, when time came for him to integrate CPU cores into Tenstorrent's products, did he try to license IP from AMD or Intel? No. He first went to ARM, and then decided RISC-V was better for the flexibility it gave him.

What we need is for nVIDIA & Qualcomm to be allowed to buy x86 Licenses and join the x86 Family of CPU makers.
At this point, I'm sure they wouldn't even bother if they could.
 

bit_user

Titan
Ambassador
Amd and Intel KNOW x86 is a dead technology that is kept alive through bandaids and they know their value is bound to keeping it alive as long as they can.
As long as there's demand, why wouldn't they keep developing it?

The healthy way of moving on would be to embrace arm or risc-v
AMD has built ARM CPUs in the past (indeed, Jim Keller was even working on one - the K12) and is rumored to be doing it again. Intel has been dabbling with RISC-V, but it's unclear how seriously.

with advanced x86 to modern isa software translators for the transition phase, but that would mean the end of the duopole…
These tools already exist. AMD and Intel don't need to develop them.
 

acadia11

Distinguished
Jan 31, 2010
953
19
18,985
In other words they'll get close but stay out of ARMs reach!

All puns intended who ever stated the ARMs race with x86s is an out-dated way of looking at the CPU world today has got the right idea. CPU's are more complex than that today and "x86" and
"ARM" have evolved into architectures that adopt solutions that are similar and novel to today's problems. Not the rudimentary and outdated modes of CISC and RISC computing definitions that worked 40-50 years ago, they mix and match concepts now.
 
Last edited:

DS426

Upstanding
May 15, 2024
192
166
260
Amd and Intel KNOW x86 is a dead technology that is kept alive through bandaids and they know their value is bound to keeping it alive as long as they can.

The healthy way of moving on would be to embrace arm or risc-v with advanced x86 to modern isa software translators for the transition phase, but that would mean the end of the duopole…
x86 is dead? Prove it -- when did this happen?

No, friend. x86 has stiff competition and needs to innovate. Apparently they've realized this, otherwise they wouldn't be collaborating on x86-ng (next generation).
 
This mostly seems like everyone decided to get ahead of the more significant proposals for x86 modification. I can't imagine something like x86S ever happening without AMD and Intel being on the same page. It also seems like the best path forward for continuing x86 with no obvious disadvantages to those involved.