Intel Sneaky Tricks Against AMD CPUs Surface.

[CarlosRex]

Independent developers have been working on a new instruction Library for CPUs called Yeppp! for sometime, the main goal of this new library is to create a compiler that is optimized for all CPU platforms, including Intel, AMD & ARM. This was driven by the intentional sabotage lead by intel against AMD CPUs via "dirty" compilers that would cripple AMD CPU performance by up to 100%.

 

In layman's terms what the intel compilers do is if they want to calculate the value of 2, they feed the code 1+1=2 to intel CPUs, and feed the code 1+0.1+0.1+0.1+0.1+0.1+0.1+0.1+ 0.1+ 0.1+0.1=2 to AMD CPUs, clearly the bad code will make the calculations run significantly slower.

 

And software developers are forced to use these compilers, because there is no alternative, except now Yeppp! is emerging. You can read about these compilers in more detail here & here

[Nort]

Hasn't Intel always played dirty with AMD, such as when they paid retailers to only sell PCs with Intel CPUs?

[Lays]

im sure all companies do this to an extent, they just dont get caught

[Beskamir]

im sure all companies do this to an extent, they just dont get caught

some play dirty A LOT MORE and others do it from a kinder perspective.

[carolkarine]

im sure all companies do this to an extent, they just dont get caught

 

and that makes it okay?

[Lays]

and that makes it okay?

 

 

Nowhere did I say it was ok lol

[LOLPhilips]

AMD would try this to some extend to if they could, Intel is just a far bigger player at this very moment and programmers see that 2... If AMD wanted they could get a few benchmarks out favoring AMD all the way they could do it for sure.. If you know its biased and you care enough about the one being bullied just try another bench or just buy the other one either way..
If you have a preference that's just fine dont just go and rub it in each others faces

[TheProfosist]

So wait from what I read the Intel's compiler is optimized for their instruction sets and their CPU's how is this a surprise? There are other options available from what im reading their just not as good. The only thing that i could possibly see as a problem is if they stated it was optimized for all CPUs and instructions sets equally which i really doubt they did at any point.

[Godlygamer23]

If true, this isn't surprising. How many things are "optimized" for certain hardware? Many games are "optimized" for AMD and NVIDIA hardware, and then through various game updates or driver updates are the performance issues addressed(sometimes they're not). As to the topic at hand, is this on all programs or specific programs? If specific programs, what programs? Besides, remember the claims made by AMD fanboys with the Bulldozer chips? That the poor performance was because of Intel optimized programs - when in reality it was because AMD made a terrible architecture. 

[TheProfosist]

If true, this isn't surprising. How many things are "optimized" for certain hardware? Many games are "optimized" for AMD and NVIDIA hardware, and then through various game updates or driver updates are the performance issues addressed(sometimes they're not). As to the topic at hand, is this on all programs or specific programs? If specific programs, what programs? Besides, remember the claims made by AMD fanboys with the Bulldozer chips? That the poor performance was because of Intel optimized programs - when in reality it was because AMD made a terrible architecture. 

 

Its actually pretty common for games to initially be optimized for GPU vendor of the other right out of the box as its a good way to promote your graphics cards. Its also pretty common to have applications, especially processing intensive ones, to be optimized for certain instruction sets and architectures along with certain graphics card technologies.

 

Well back when Bulldozer came out windows was not optimized to handle the new architecture, which is more Microsoft's and AMD's fault. They later launched a update for this but even then only in highly threaded workload would it compete with the intel processors it was supposed to.

 

AMD's architecture isnt all that bad really, rather its how programs are written since forever that hasnt been changing even though we have had 64 bit and multithreaded cpu's since the P4 era in the consumer space.

[TechSage]

I bet AMD has done their fair and share of dirty things..although it didn't help them.

I love you AMD :)

[Lavi]

So wait from what I read the Intel's compiler is optimized for their instruction sets and their CPU's how is this a surprise? There are other options available from what im reading their just not as good. The only thing that i could possibly see as a problem is if they stated it was optimized for all CPUs and instructions sets equally which i really doubt they did at any point.

 

The problem is even if a AMD CPU has relevant institution sets (and they have everything relivent) the output of Intel's compiler feeds it the slower code simply because it is not an Intel CPU, not because there is a good reason to.

 

Also while they never explicitly said that until a lawsuit was settled they never said it didn't. Now they have to of course.

[Emperor_Piehead]

This isn't surprising. Bigger companies have been doing similar things to keep the smaller companies small. Samsung was paying people to downvote the htc one on reddit.

[mr moose]

This is old news, I remember reading about it about a year ago now.  The compilers have been updated.

 

 

This was driven by the intentional sabotage lead by intel against AMD CPUs via "dirty" compilers that would cripple AMD CPU performance by up to 100%.


 

 

If you cripple something by 100% you stop it from working altogether.

[TechFan@ic]

The problem is even if a AMD CPU has relevant institution sets (and they have everything relivent) the output of Intel's compiler feeds it the slower code simply because it is not an Intel CPU, not because there is a good reason to.

 

Also while they never explicitly said that until a lawsuit was settled they never said it didn't. Now they have to of course.

This explains the situation exactly as it is, with the intel compilers, it's not just "optimized" for intel CPUs, rather when anything but an intel CPU is detected a known slower code is intentionally fed into the execution pipeline to cripple performance, and indeed there was a lawsuit, actually more than one & intel settled these allegations out of court by paying AMD, so intel actually admits that it's doing it & that it's illegal.

[Immort]

I have a strong feeling Linus is not going to cover this in the live stream even though he covered similar Apple-Samsung, Microsoft-Sony subjects just because of his intel sponsorship, that's why I hate sponsorships.

[GPUXPert]

Hopefully with the new gaming consoles all powered by AMD CPUs, the developers will make new engines using clean compilers so it should at least take this dirty code out of games.

[TheProfosist]

This explains the situation exactly as it is, with the intel compilers, it's not just "optimized" for intel CPUs, rather when anything but an intel CPU is detected a known slower code is intentionally fed into the execution pipeline to cripple performance, and indeed there was a lawsuit, actually more than one & intel settled these allegations out of court by paying AMD, so intel actually admits that it's doing it & that it's illegal.

 

I still dont get how its illegal to favor its cpu's with its compilers?

[TechFan@ic]

I still dont get how its illegal to favor its cpu's with its compilers?

That's not illegal, what's illegal is intentionally feeding bad code via a compiler to other non-intel CPUs.

 

[mr moose]

It's kind of complicated but the illegal bit was not what they did or how they did it but the fact that they knew doing it was anti-competitive. And thus they were found guilty of anti-competitive behaviour. As opposed to producing a compiler that breaks laws x, y and z.

If intel was not the only company producing the compiler (read: if they didn't own the rights and licence the technology to AMD) then there may have been no grounds for a lawsuit.

[CarlosRex]

This is old news, I remember reading about it about a year ago now.  The compilers have been updated.

Updating it didn't fix anything, read agnor's blog, i provided the link.

 

If you cripple something by 100% you stop it from working altogether.

That's what happened on AMD's bobcat architecture, it stopped it from working all together..

 

[mr moose]

Updating it didn't fix anything, read agnor's blog, i provided the link.

 

That's what happened on AMD's bobcat architecture, it stopped it from working all together..

 

Agnors blog was written in 2009, did you read it?

 

So anyone with an AMD bobcat CPU finds there computer just stops when they run any software engineered with the intel compiler? 

[alicskysareblue]

anti competitive tactics, I am pretty sure amd would do the same thing if they could.

[CarlosRex]

mr moose, on 14 Jul 2013 - 12:04 PM, said:

Agnors blog was written in 2009, did you read it?

It was updated well into 2013 -_- .

http://www.agner.org/optimize/blog/read.php?i=49

Quote after the latest release from intel.

Quote

Author: Agner

It's not getting better. The latest version of Intel's SVML (small vector math library) has some functions that can only be called from processors with AVX because the input parameter is an AVX vector (YMM register). There is no logical reason why these functions should have a CPU dispatcher, yet they have two different code paths for the same instruction set: An optimized version for Intel processors with AVX and an inferior version for other brands of CPU with AVX.

Quote

So anyone with an AMD bobcat CPU finds there computer just stops when they run any software engineered with the intel compiler?

They don't work yes.

[LonliestofAll]

This has been known for a while. Competitors almost always do this, but AMD has never done anything about it. So, what AMD needs to do is find some developers to make some synthetic benchmarks and more compilers that are optimized for their CPU's.