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

>>Yes, but once it has shipped and people may have come to depend on it it will break stuff, not fix stuff.

If people depend on functionality that is explicitly unsupported then I don't know what to say other than that I don't see how that's Intel's responsibility. If you buy a CPU that doesn't support AVX-512 instructions in order to use AVX-512 instructions then ...I think you're the one who is wrong here.

To go back to my car analogy - if you buy a car that isn't type approved for towing, and yet you install a tow bar anyway, you can't complain to the manufacturer if stuff breaks.

>>Besides the obvious benefit of first having benchmarks out there claiming these chips are better than they really are

Are any of the published benchmarks using AVX-512 instructions that were used by Intel in advertising, and were those in fact available at the time when the benchmarks were ran?

>>If it would be a fix then it would be that something that was advertised did not work, and now it does

Those CPUs were not compliant with their own published spec, now they are - it is absolutely a fix.



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

Search: