Programs that favor Intel processors..

[ch3w2oy]

So it's pretty common knowledge that programs like Photoshop and the entire Adobe suite tend to perform better on Intel processors, right? I know there are other programs as well but I can't think of them at the moment.

 

1. Is this only the case because of Intels better/faster IPC? Or were these programs actually developed/designed to "like" Intel cores more so than AMD?

 

I'm curious because I use Adobe suite as a web developer and I switched to Ryzen from my Intel notebook (I7 7700HQ). I've always been a software person, but I'm beginning to appreciate the hardware a lot more these days and am just curious about the subject.

 

2. If AMD at least matches Intels IPC (hopefully better), will they be on the same level with these programs, or will they still favor Intel?

 

I'm not saying AMD is a good, better or great company, but I really want to see them succeed and bring some healthy competition to the table. I can't find it in myself at all, even with the lower IPC, to buy an Intel processor over an AMD one at this point, mainly due to pricing (if you're just gaming this may be different, I'm not judging).

 

Seeing how Nvidia is now supporting Freesync, too, AMD needs to pull something out of there ass to see growth in the GPU market like they're seeing in the CPU space.

 

[Enderman]

There's other stuff that matters in addition to IPC, such as cache size and speed at different levels, branch prediction, etc.

 

I don't think anyone intentionally designs something to work better on an intel CPU.

[WereCatf]

10 minutes ago, ChewToy! said:

Or were these programs actually developed/designed to "like" Intel cores more so than AMD?

It's not that they were deliberately designed to perform better on Intel, it's that the devs spent less effort on optimizing them for AMD.

[gbergeron]

8 minutes ago, WereCatf said:

It's not that they were deliberately designed to perform better on Intel, it's that the devs spent less effort on optimizing them for AMD.

It does make sense tho...

 

It's like virus. There are a lot less virus in iOS. Not because its hard to create a new virus on iOS..... simply because if you want to hurt as much people as possible by creating a virus, what platform would you aim ? The most popular, which is windows/android by far\

 

So if you develop a game/app and want to aim at the most popular platform its obviously intel. That being said im not saying they dont care about AMD just that the big market is mostly intel so why would they waste time optimizing for amd

[WereCatf]

2 minutes ago, gbergeron said:

That being said im not saying they dont care about AMD just that the big market is mostly intel so why would they waste time optimizing for amd

It could also be that their dev-environment has become too rigid over time and so they haven't been able to take much advantage of all the tools AMD provides for optimizing for their platforms as well. Wouldn't be the first company to have such an issue; refactoring the dev-env can be a shitton of work if you've let it stagnate and get too rigid.

 

All this said, AMD's Ryzen has been gosh durn popular and with the sheer number of physical cores that they offer, Adobe is likely to at least consider putting in the effort now.

[gbergeron]

2 hours ago, WereCatf said:

It could also be that their dev-environment has become too rigid over time and so they haven't been able to take much advantage of all the tools AMD provides for optimizing for their platforms as well. Wouldn't be the first company to have such an issue; refactoring the dev-env can be a shitton of work if you've let it stagnate and get too rigid.

 

All this said, AMD's Ryzen has been gosh durn popular and with the sheer number of physical cores that they offer, Adobe is likely to at least consider putting in the effort now.

Well this link shows how AMD market share is actually dropping and then recovering a littttle bit but nothing huge... it is currently sitting at  around 20% and intel has around 80% of the market share

https://www.cpubenchmark.net/market_share.html

 

[ch3w2oy]

4 hours ago, Enderman said:

There's other stuff that matters in addition to IPC, such as cache size and speed at different levels, branch prediction, etc.

 

I don't think anyone intentionally designs something to work better on an intel CPU.

 

4 hours ago, WereCatf said:

It's not that they were deliberately designed to perform better on Intel, it's that the devs spent less effort on optimizing them for AMD.

 

Ok, yea I knew there was more to it, I was just wondering if AMDs faster processors would be enough, but I guess it's up to the developers too. Kind of like games and different GPUs, no?

[dgsddfgdfhgs]

1 hour ago, gbergeron said:

it is currently sitting at  around 20% and intel has around 80% of the market share

I believe office use pc and old gen pc contributed a lot for intel.

 

[X_X]

@ChewToy! Are you looking for something like

 

http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showthread.php?242272-Intel-s-quot-cripple-AMD-quot-function-Will-Intel-be-forced-to-remove-the-quot-cripple-AMD-quot-funct

 

However, the Intel CPU dispatcher does not only check which instruction set is supported by the CPU, it also checks the vendor ID string. If the vendor string says "GenuineIntel" then it uses the optimal code path. If the CPU is not from Intel then, in most cases, it will run the slowest possible version of the code, even if the CPU is fully compatible with a better version.

[SpaceGhostC2C]

4 hours ago, ChewToy! said:

1. Is this only the case because of Intels better/faster IPC? Or were these programs actually developed/designed to "like" Intel cores more so than AMD?

It's mostly higher single-core performance, based on a combination of IPC advantage and generally higher clocks (for newer Intel models anyway). In some, more "niche" cases if you want, there are specific additional sources of gaps for certain product lineups, like AVX2 capabilities.

 

4 hours ago, ChewToy! said:

2. If AMD at least matches Intels IPC (hopefully better), will they be on the same level with these programs, or will they still favor Intel?

Mostly yes, although there will be those cases where AVX2 or something like that makes a difference, so progress would be needed on that front as well.

 

10 minutes ago, X_X said:

@ChewToy! Are you looking for something like

 

http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showthread.php?242272-Intel-s-quot-cripple-AMD-quot-function-Will-Intel-be-forced-to-remove-the-quot-cripple-AMD-quot-funct

 

Intel compilers are known to provide sub-optimal executables for AMD processors, which would affect the programs written by anyone using their compilers (it wouldn't be the software developer itself introducing the artificial gap). At the same time, Intel is also known to provide some of the best compilers regardless of the target CPU. I think this is less so in C/C++/etc, but in Fortran, Intel compilers penalize AMD CPUs by not using identical instruction sets under different trademarks, but code compiled with Intel's compiler still run substantially faster than code compiled with third parties' compilers on AMD CPUs (I had Intel compilers from before Bulldozer was released producing faster code for FX CPUs than competing compilers that allow for explicit FX-specific optimizations...