Intel's 1B Transistor chip by 2005

[P4Man]

oh and one more thing: most of those links are pretty old, 2001 or earlier. JIT's have been improving by leaps and bounds...

= The views stated herein are my personal views, and not necessarily the views of my wife. =

 

[imgod2u]

Are you sure ? Check this:
specFP score Dell . Its the highest P4 SpecFP I could find, and HT is DISABLED. SMT/CMT helped on older Spec95, but current compilers have not yet enabled any speedups for Spec2000 using SMT.

Replaced by <A HREF="http://www.spec.org/cpu2000/results/res2004q3/cpu2000-20040621-03126.html" target="_new">this</A> with SMT enabled. The <A HREF="http://www.spec.org/cpu2000/results/res2004q3/cpu2000-20040621-03124.html" target="_new">SMT-enabled</A> 3.4EE also scores higher. Notice that all the recent submissions have enabled SMT and use ICC 8.0.

Thats nonsense. "long runtime" has nothing to do with it. Profiling can happen after just 1 or 2 cycles, much in the same way a tracecache helps, and not only for "long", repetitive tasks.

Erm, not in software it can't. It takes more than 1 or 2 cycles for an application to even receive back the result of a calculation, let alone figure anything out about it. Fine-granuarity dynamic optimizations can occur on-hardware only. How would a JIT profile a code that has only issued 2 instructions? How could it even process the instructions to do that profiling? JIT's aren't run in parallel (perhaps on SMT systems but that hardly means it runs exactly parallel) with the main application, they're switched in and out. To properly optimize an application for the specific architecture, long-term profiles need to be determined (in order to find the critical section) and optimization occurs there.

"We are Microsoft, resistance is futile." - Bill Gates, 2015.

 

[Xeon]

imgod2u

Yes you are good sir.

Xeon

<font color=red>Post created with being a dickhead in mind.</font color=red>
<font color=white>For all emotional and slanderous statements contact THG for all law suits.</font color=white>

 

[P4Man]

>Replaced by this with SMT enabled.

Indeed. Hmm, well at least grant me this is a VERY recent development, I Don't read spec submissions every few weeks Interesting though, I'd like to see how it performs without HT on the same compiler. Also, while ICC might be able to take some advantage of SMT on single threaded FP code, I am unsure if IBM's compilers are as clever.

>Erm, not in software it can't. It takes more than 1 or 2
>cycles for an application to even receive back the result
>of a calculation

I didnt mean that as in "clock cycles" obviously. Should have used the word "iterations" instead.. still, the links ought to show JIT performance isnt any worse than statically compiled code..

= The views stated herein are my personal views, and not necessarily the views of my wife. =

 

[imgod2u]

Indeed. Hmm, well at least grant me this is a VERY recent development, I Don't read spec submissions every few weeks Interesting though, I'd like to see how it performs without HT on the same compiler. Also, while ICC might be able to take some advantage of SMT on single threaded FP code, I am unsure if IBM's compilers are as clever.

Yes, but then again, the Power5's submissions are more recent than any.

As for IBM's compilers. I'm not sure of the exact details but the core of the Power5 remains almost the same as the Power4. With the exception of the faster cache, SMT and multi-core, I'm not sure what else could account for such a dramatic increase in SpecFP scores.

I didnt mean that as in "clock cycles" obviously. Should have used the word "iterations" instead.. still, the links ought to show JIT performance isnt any worse than statically compiled code..

The links showed that under certain circumstances, the best JIT performance is about on-par with less than aggressive optimizations using GCC rather than ICC on a Pentium 4. Something which ICC has traditionally been much better at optimizing for. It does show promise, but that hardly qualifies as the best static vs the best JIT.

"We are Microsoft, resistance is futile." - Bill Gates, 2015.

 

[P4Man]

> I'm not sure what else could account for such a dramatic
>increase in SpecFP scores.

Note that not only SpecFP scores have increased by such magnitude, also TPC-C, SpecJBB, SAP,.. scores are out of this world.

> It does show promise, but that hardly qualifies as the
>best static vs the best JIT.

The initial point was that JIT often create code that runs faster than static compilers. If JIT performance including VM launch time and compilation time is overall on par with exectution time of static compiled code, I think this point is proven.

= The views stated herein are my personal views, and not necessarily the views of my wife. =