Thief 4 CPU benchmarks

[soccerballtux]

I dont recall anything from nVidia that locked out anybody's cpu. In any case, I assume it was a satirical post. If not, it is absurd, because mantle already locked out more than 50% of the gpus and 80% (just a guess, the number is probably well above 90%) of the games. Ah, heck, I guess it is not so silly, lets lock out 75% of the cpus too.

no, what WOULD be absurd would be to write a Mantle driver for your competitors GPU for FREE just BECAUSE. LMAO. You can't be serious

 

[frozentundra123456]

No, i was just joking. It makes a lot more sense to lock out 90 percent of the market from using your product.

 

[TheELF]

no, what WOULD be absurd would be to write a Mantle driver for your competitors GPU for FREE just BECAUSE. LMAO. You can't be serious

And still every other AMD fan is crying about how the intel compiler is not optimized to produce better code on AMDs then intels....

 

[AtenRa]

And still every other AMD fan is crying about how the intel compiler is not optimized to produce better code on AMDs then intels....

It is another thing NOT optimize your software for your competitor and another think to deliberately Cripple your competitor.

NVIDIA is doing what Intel has done with their compilers and payed benchmarks.

 

[TheELF]

It is another thing NOT optimize your software for your competitor and another think to deliberately Cripple your competitor.

Did never happen.
Intel's compiler is used in research and industry so it has to be as perfect as possible,without having 100% access to the AMD schematics intel can't guarantee 100% flawless execution of special code so it uses the safest code available.
Intel is not crippling anything they just don't go into any extreme trouble to optimize for AMD.

 

[AtenRa]

Did never happen.
Intel's compiler is used in research and industry so it has to be as perfect as possible,without having 100% access to the AMD schematics intel can't guarantee 100% flawless execution of special code so it uses the safest code available.
Intel is not crippling anything they just don't go into any extreme trouble to optimize for AMD.

Either you are young or ignorant of what Intel have done in the past.

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

Intel Forced to Remove "Cripple AMD" Function from Compiler

Intel finally agrees to pay $15 to Pentium 4 owners over AMD Athlon benchmarking shenanigans

 

[TheELF]

AMD says there was no wrongdoing ... AMD fanboys still cling to their believes.
http://www.amd.com/Documents/AMD_Intel_Settlement_Agreement_-_Full.pdf

The parties agreed that the settlement was intended solely as a compromise
of disputed claims, and was not to be understood as a concession or determination that either party has engaged in any wrongdoing.

 

[SlowSpyder]

AMD says there was no wrongdoing ... AMD fanboys still cling to their believes.
http://www.amd.com/Documents/AMD_Intel_Settlement_Agreement_-_Full.pdf

I don't know much about the situation you guys are talking about. But I can tell you that I don't think that statement really means anything.

 

[PG]

AMD says there was no wrongdoing ... AMD fanboys still cling to their believes.
http://www.amd.com/Documents/AMD_Intel_Settlement_Agreement_-_Full.pdf

Please don't play stupid. Why would Intel pay AMD over a billion dollars if they did nothing wrong?
You know that's just BS lawyer talk that must have been one condition that Intel demanded before they agreed to pay anything.

 

[selni]

It is another thing NOT optimize your software for your competitor and another think to deliberately Cripple your competitor.

NVIDIA is doing what Intel has done with their compilers and payed benchmarks.

It's not quite that simple - not supporting is closer to the truth. Intel's compiler was generating several codepaths for various feature sets and inserting code to pick one at runtime based on the CPU detected. Said dispatch code checked for a bunch of known Intel CPUs/featuresets and if your CPU didn't match anything then ran the low feature/compatibility variant. That was probably because it's not as simple as just removing the Intel check (compilers have to work around a lot of processor weirdness, it's not just feature checks), but I'm sure hurting competitors was viewed as a benefit. The problem really was that it didn't optimise for AMD CPUs.

The settlement was basically requiring them to support AMD CPUs, which is reasonable given the competitive concerns (would an independant compiler have had such poor AMD support?).

 

[TheELF]

Please don't play stupid. Why would Intel pay AMD over a billion dollars if they did nothing wrong?
You know that's just BS lawyer talk that must have been one condition that Intel demanded before they agreed to pay anything.

AMD took the money and agreed to the BS lawyer talk,why?
If they actually had a case against intel they would have made a lot more money.