Re: AMD vs Intel for video format conversions and editing

Peabody wrote:
> As the OP on this thread, I really appreciate having this
> information. I guess the question is whether major video
> editing and conversion software authors pretty much already
> know about this and avoid using Intel compilers, or will do
> so in future versions. Can you think of a forum where I
> might ask that question and get an informed response from
> the multimedia gurus?

I wouldn't worry too much about it. My understanding is that most
companies actually compile their code with the Microsoft (or GCC in
Linux) compiler rather than the Intel one. Intel sort of markets
itself as the Lexus to the Microsoft Toyota: almost the same, just a
little better. There are other companies out there marketing themselves
as the luxury compiler too, like Pathscale and PGI, so Intel isn't the
only luxury compiler game in town.

>
> I understand that this Intel compiler behavior is one of the
> anti-competitive complaints in AMD's antitrust suit against
> Intel. I wish them luck in their suit.

What's amazing is that despite all of the sabotage, the AMD processors
manage to hold their own against Intel processors, even while executing
basic x86 code rather than the fancy high-performance extended x86
code. It's been said that AMD has come to expect this from Intel so
they've spent a lot of effort in getting their basic x86 instructions
working extremely well, and not relying on instruction extensions to
get them running fast. So they seem to have infused some of the basic
x86 features with resources from the extended x86 features, so some of
the optimizations that are available to the extended instructions may
also be valid in the basic instructions for AMD processors.

Yousuf Khan

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: What does 64 bit mean? Lame question, but hear me out :)
    ... Too bad for them the x86 instructions are by far and large generated by code ... when writing code for a specific platform using specific API's ... make a point) compiler frontend ... And that is just from Intel Corp. AMD has their own extensions like 3dnow! ...
    (microsoft.public.dotnet.languages.csharp)
  • Re: Optimization
    ... For the predictor to ... Intel has *EMBARASSED* Microsoft with its truly amazing compiler. ... but I don't remember about other new FP instructions. ...
    (comp.programming)
  • Re: LOOP - Why so slow?
    ... of complicated ones with multiple side effects, so "loop" wasn't ... loop instructions that branch forward). ... This is no big deal for a compiler. ... BS that Intel made up. ...
    (comp.lang.asm.x86)
  • Re: Non Intel & AMD Arch
    ... > Please state your opinion what you think Intel & AMD arch are better. ... Dealing with big endian isn't slow on x86 processors. ... This is one of the simplest ALU instructions, and it's fast on ... > many other processors that use RISC. ...
    (comp.lang.asm.x86)
  • Re: Intel details future Larrabee graphics chip
    ... programming a GPU because it honors the well established x86 arch? ... and Larrabee doesn't appear to support SSE instructions either... ... I remember at Intel someone having to write a dynamic ...
    (comp.arch)