Pretty sure it is for both. After all, Intel has been pretty heavily involved in the OpenCL initiative.
We are talking about closely related but still different stuff. Of course you can use OpenCL for performing non-graphic computations on the GPU. You can do the same with the GPU on AMD APUs. But I was mentioning the 4 CUs for compute on the PS4 chip. Thanks to HSA, you don't need OpenCL to acces to them and those CUs can access to system memory directly (thanks to hUMA). I see those 4 CUs somewhat as the streamlined coprocessors in CELL, with the difference that those 4 CUs can switch to rendering mode if the developers need an extra boost on graphics.
Yes I meant GFLOPS (but not GFLOPs, that's the plural of GFLOP). I'm not sure you understand that the number has nothing to do with benchmarks, they're design features of the uarch and something we know entirely.
There's no "four extra CUs." There's a set of CUs 18 on PS4. You can use them for graphics and you can use them for compute.
Which is the same as a discrete GPU. Bringing in the GPU for a PS4 comparison is not fair if you don't allow a GPU for the i7 comparison. But I thought we were only talking about CPUs here.
You sound like you're just distorting the argument to something totally weird because you don't like admitting you're wrong :/
How many times I have to say that we are using GFLOPs because we have no other data now?
Those 18 CUs are split in a 14+4 balance. Albeit the 4 CUs can switch mode to rendering if needed, the main task of the 4 CU will be on computing non-graphics stuff: e.g. physics effects. In one sense those 4 CU are like the streamlined coprocessors of the Cell
About 14 + 4 balance:
- 4 additional CUs (410 Gflops) “extra” ALU as resource for compute
- Minor boost if used for rendering
http://www.vgleaks.com/world-exclusive-orbis-unveiled-2/
If you want to introduce the GPU of the i7 comparison then introduce the full GPU of the PS4 as well. In that case the whole performance of the PS4 is not the 512 GFLOPs that I wrote above but 512 + 1433 GFLOPs. This is a total of 1945 GFLOPs, which is usually quoted as "2 TFLOPs".
I was a little underwhelmed by the performance of the 4 core kabini not being as much higher than the e-350 as I expected. It's a slight IPC improvement with double the cores.
One single jaguar core in kabini gives slightly more performance per cycle than a SB core in an i3.
Unixbench single-core index
Jaguar (kabini) @ 2.0 GHz: 403.8
SB (i3-2100T) @ 2.5 GHz: 495.5
Where jaguar(kabini) shine is in multi-core performance.
Not to mention, 1 flop is not equal to 1 flop (As also seen over and over again.). Its the absolute worst value of measurement you can use. One system might need 4 flops to complete what another systemc an do in 1 flop.
Evidently a 1 flop
is equal to 1 flop. What I think you are trying to say is that machine A with 1 flop can be faster than machine B with a 1 flop. We know that.
We know that a console with 2 TFLOP will be faster than a gaming PC with 2 TFLOP.