Linked by Thom Holwerda on Fri 5th Apr 2013 16:04 UTC
General Development "For years, PC programmers used x86 assembly to write performance-critical code. However, 32-bit PCs are being replaced with 64-bit ones, and the underlying assembly code has changed. This white paper is an introduction to x64 assembly. No prior knowledge of x86 code is needed, although it makes the transition easier."
Thread beginning with comment 557801
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[2]: Comment by Drumhellar
by Drumhellar on Fri 5th Apr 2013 21:09 UTC in reply to "RE: Comment by Drumhellar"
Drumhellar
Member since:
2005-07-12

Well, Atom has this problem as well. All Atoms support up to SSE3, some have support for SSSE3 (An extension to SSE3), and the newest support Intel VT-x.

Obviously, they don't support the AMD extensions (3D Now!, XOP, FMA4, and CVT16)

All this stuff adds complexity to the front end (One of the main targets for reducing power consumption for the Atom), but at least the back-end stages doesn't get significantly more complex.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[3]: Comment by Drumhellar
by Neolander on Sat 6th Apr 2013 08:26 in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by Drumhellar"
Neolander Member since:
2010-03-08

Well, Atom has this problem as well. All Atoms support up to SSE3, some have support for SSSE3 (An extension to SSE3), and the newest support Intel VT-x.

Obviously, they don't support the AMD extensions (3D Now!, XOP, FMA4, and CVT16)

All this stuff adds complexity to the front end (One of the main targets for reducing power consumption for the Atom), but at least the back-end stages doesn't get significantly more complex.

My point was not that Atom processors do not suffer from extension proliferation, but that x86 extensions are not guaranteed to last forever. Especially considering that in computing history, any time computer hardware has started to get dangerously close to "good enough", hardware guys have come up with a more constrained computer form factor that called for less capable CPUs and thus yet another new performance race.

Today, cellphones SoCs are getting so fast that Apple, Google and Microsoft have a hard time keeping OS bloat high enough to drive hardware sales. So I'm pretty sure that somewhere in R&D labs, the Next Big Thing is closing in pretty fast. And that its earliest iteration will have an incredibly primitive CPU by modern standards.

Unless, of course, everything goes cloud at this point, bringing back the mainframe age. In which case CPU extensions could still become irrelevant, but this time it would be because no one cares about the performance of individual CPUs when the main issue is spreading work on thousands of these.

Edited 2013-04-06 08:32 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[4]: Comment by Drumhellar
by TempleOS on Sat 6th Apr 2013 08:52 in reply to "RE[3]: Comment by Drumhellar"
TempleOS Member since:
2013-04-03


My point was not that Atom processors do not suffer from extension proliferation, but that x86 Today, cellphones SoCs are getting so fast that Apple, Google and Microsoft have a hard time keeping OS bloat high enough to drive hardware sales. So I'm pretty sure that somewhere in R&D labs, the Next Big Thing is closing in pretty fast. And that its earliest iteration will have an incredibly primitive CPU by modern standards.


My OS is x86_64 but I do not use paging and everything runs in ring-0, so a primitive CPU could be used.

Reply Parent Score: 1