Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

"WASTED WORK ON THE INTEL CORE I7", slide#12 (page 13 in pdf) is fascinating to me. But I want to know how the data was collected, and what the % wasted work actually means.

40% wasted work, does that mean that they checked the branch-predictor and found that 40% of the time was spent on (wrongfully) speculated branches?

It also suggests that for all of the power-efficiency faults of branch predictors (aka: running power-consuming computations when it was "unnecessary"), the best you could do is maybe a 40% reduction in power consumption (no task seems to be 40% inefficient).



> ... INTEL CORE I7

When someone says Intel i5 or i7, I immediately wonder if they're talking about 2008 i7 or 2019 model.

Intel would be smart to retire whole i3/i5/i7/i9 branding. People seem to think every i5 or i7 is the same.


> People seem to think every i5 or i7 is the same.

Unfortunately, this is a feature, not a bug. Intel wants their branding to have this effect... the lay-person isn't supposed to understand Sandy Bridge (i7-2700k) vs Skylake (i7-6700k)


So Intel wants laypersons not to realize there's something faster available and to upgrade their x86 based systems?

Before that era people didn't know much about the details either, but they did understand 800 MHz was faster than 533 MHz.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: