Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sun 3rd Jan 2010 20:32 UTC
General Development Here's something you probably don't know, but really should - especially if you're a programmer, and especially especially if you're using Intel's compiler. It's a fact that's not widely known, but Intel's compiler deliberately and knowingly cripples performance for non-Intel (AMD/VIA) processors.
Thread beginning with comment 402251
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
CPUID flags
by bhtooefr on Sun 3rd Jan 2010 21:01 UTC
bhtooefr
Member since:
2009-02-19

Would it be illegal for AMD and VIA to just put "GenuineIntel" in the CPUID, and use another field for AuthenticAMD and CentaurHauls?

I look at it as comparable to Internet Explorer putting "Mozilla/x.x (compatible; MSIE x.x)" as the User-Agent. (Or Opera's "Mozilla/x.x (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Opera x.x)" user-agent from a few years back.)

Reply Score: 1

RE: CPUID flags
by WereCatf on Sun 3rd Jan 2010 21:08 in reply to "CPUID flags"
WereCatf Member since:
2006-02-15

I highly doubt it'd be legal as "GenuineIntel" is most likely a registered trademark and all. Besides, doing that wouldn't help for any of the processors already out there, only for new ones.

This compiler "defect" has been a really shitty move from Intel and it gives me yet another reason to stay away from their hardware. Just for the sake of lining their own pockets they intentionally cripple the performance of millions of end-users all around the world..

Reply Parent Score: 3

v RE[2]: CPUID flags
by tylerdurden on Sun 3rd Jan 2010 22:45 in reply to "RE: CPUID flags"
RE: CPUID flags
by bile on Sun 3rd Jan 2010 21:09 in reply to "CPUID flags"
bile Member since:
2005-07-08

It shouldn't be though I suspect Intel would claim it was trademark or copyright infringement or perhaps fraud. So long as AMD, Via or whoever was clear they did so to the customer and/or allowed them to toggle the 'feature' it should be allowed.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE: CPUID flags
by Drumhellar on Sun 3rd Jan 2010 21:28 in reply to "CPUID flags"
Drumhellar Member since:
2005-07-12

It would undoubtedly be a violation of the x86 licensing agreement AMD and Via have with Intel.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE: CPUID flags - Palm
by jabbotts on Sun 3rd Jan 2010 23:23 in reply to "CPUID flags"
jabbotts Member since:
2007-09-06

I think AMD spoofing Intel's hardware identifier is much closer to Palm spoofing Apple's hardware identifier. In both cases, the reason for needing the spoof is pretty scummy.

The real solution would be to fix icc so that it's no longer leveraged to impose intel chip lockin. Apple at least has some grounds for bundling iTunes/iPod though it really should be music player separate from media manager if it was really about the end user. Intel modifying a generic code compiler to cripple non-Intel; I'm not seeing any grounds for that.

Actually, I think the developers out there who do have to work with icc should all call into Intel once a week if not once a day until it's fixed. Overwealming the call center should eventually get the point across.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[2]: CPUID flags - Palm
by Scali on Sun 3rd Jan 2010 23:29 in reply to "RE: CPUID flags - Palm"
Scali Member since:
2010-01-03

Intel modifying a generic code compiler to cripple non-Intel; I'm not seeing any grounds for that.


That's a misunderstanding and/or misrepresentation of the facts.
Intel's compilers are Intel's own work, and never were 'generic code compilers', they were always aimed strictly at Intel's own products.
Intel didn't 'modify' anything, nor did they 'cripple' anything.
Optimizing for anything other than Intel's own CPUs was just never part of the goals of the Intel compiler suite.
You can't 'modify' or 'cripple' something that has never been different anyway.

Reply Parent Score: 0