• Kairos@lemmy.today
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    146
    ·
    edit-2
    25 days ago

    I highly doubt that unless they invented magic.

    Edit: oh… They ommitted the “up to” in the headline.

  • xantoxis@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    118
    ·
    25 days ago

    This change is likened to expanding a CPU from a one-lane road to a multi-lane highway

    This analogy just pegged the bullshit meter so hard I almost died of eyeroll.

    • AnarchistArtificer@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      25 days ago

      You’ve got to be careful with rolling your eyes, because the parallelism of the two eyes means that the eye roll can be twice as powerful ^1


      (1) If measured against the silly baseline of a single eyeroll

    • rottingleaf@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      25 days ago

      Apparently the percentage of people actually understanding what they are doing in the management part of the industry is now too low to filter out even such bullshit.

  • Th4tGuyII@fedia.io
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    91
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    25 days ago

    The TL;DR for the article is that the headline isn’t exactly true. At this moment in time their PPU can potentially double a CPU’s performance - the 100x claim comes with the caveat of “further software optimisation”.


    Tbh, I’m sceptical of the caveat. It feels like me telling someone I can only draw a stickman right now, but I could paint the Mona Lisa with some training.

    Of course that could happen, but it’s not very likely to - so I’ll believe it when I see it.

    Having said that they’re not wrong about CPU bottlenecks and the slowed rate of CPU performance improvements - so a doubling of performance would be huge in this current market.

    • barsquid@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      25
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      25 days ago

      Putting the claim instead of the reality in the headline is journalistic malpractice. 2x for free is still pretty great tho.

      • barsquid@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        28
        ·
        25 days ago

        Just finished the article, it’s not for free at all. Chips need to be designed to use it. I’m skeptical again. There’s no point IMO. Nobody wants to put the R&D into massively parallel CPUs when they can put that effort into GPUs.

        • frezik@midwest.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          25 days ago

          Not every problem is amenable to GPUs. If it has a lot of branching, or needs to fetch back and forth from memory a lot, GPUs don’t help.

          Now, does this thing have exactly the same limitations? I’m guessing yes, but it’s all too vague to know for sure. It’s sounds like they’re doing what superscalar CPUs have done for a while. On x86, that starts with the original Pentium from 1993, and Crays going back to the '60s. What are they doing to supercharge this idea?

          Does this avoid some of security problems that have popped up with superscalar archs? For example, some kernel code running at ring 0 is running alongside userspace code, and it all gets the same ring 0 level as a result.

    • Clusterfck@lemmy.sdf.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      16
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      25 days ago

      I get that we have to impress shareholders, but why can’t they just be honest and say it doubles CPU performance with the chance of even further improvement with software optimization. Doubling performance of the same hardware is still HUGE.

            • Feathercrown@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              24 days ago

              I don’t know what “they” you’re talking about, but I think it’s clear I’m referring to the person responsible for writing the original title. Not OP and not the article author if the publisher is choosing the title.

              • Zorque@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                24 days ago

                And I think it’s pretty clear I’m not. And it seems pretty clear the OP wasn’t either.

                So… are you just stating random things for the fuck of it, or did you have an actual reason for bringing up a non-sequitur?

  • Buffalox@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    48
    ·
    edit-2
    25 days ago

    Why is this bullshit upvoted?
    Already the first sentence, they change from the headline “without recoding” to “with further optimization”.
    Then the explanation “a companion chip that optimizes processing tasks in real-time”
    This is already done at compiler level and internally in any modern CPU for more than a decade.

    It might be possible to some degree for some specific forms of code, like maybe Java. But generally for the CPU this is bullshit, and the headline is decidedly dishonest.

  • rtxn@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    46
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    25 days ago

    Cybercriminals are creaming their jorts at the potential exploits this might open up.

  • Shadow@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    20
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    25 days ago

    Hmm, so sounds like they’re moving the kernel scheduler down to a hardware layer? Basically just better smp?

    • Chocrates@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      17
      ·
      25 days ago

      Processors have an execution pipeline, so a single command like mov has some number of actions the CPU takes to execute it. CPU designers already have some magic that allows them to execute these out of order as well as other stuff like pre calculating what they think the next command will probably be.

      It’s been a decade since my cpu class so I am butchering that explanation, but I think that is what they are proposing messing with

      • Kairos@lemmy.today
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        15
        ·
        edit-2
        25 days ago

        That’s accurate.

        Its done through multiple algorithms, but the general idea is to schedule calculations as soon as possible, accounting for data hazards to make sure everything is still equivalent to non out of order execution. Individual circuits can execute different things at the same time. Special hardware is needed to make the algorithms work.

        There’s also branch prediction which is the same thing kind of except the CPU needs a way to ensure if the prediction was actually correct.

  • Coasting0942@reddthat.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    18
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    25 days ago

    Others have already laughed at this idea, but on a similar topic:

    I know we’ve basically disabled a lot of features that sped up the CPU but introduced security flaws. Is there a way to turn those features back on for an airgapped computer intentionally?

  • Amanda@aggregatet.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    16
    ·
    25 days ago

    Has anyone been able to find an actual description of what this does? I clicked two layers deep and neither explains the details. It does sound like they’re doing CPU scheduling in the hardware, which is cool and makes some sense, but the descriptions are too vague to explain what the hell this is except “more parallelism goes brrrr” and it’s not clear to me why current GPUs aren’t already that.

  • 9point6@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    17
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    25 days ago

    Haha okay

    Edit: after a skim and a quick Google, this basically looks like a packaging up of existing modern processor features (sorta AVX/SVE with a load of speculative execution thrown on top)

  • blahsay@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    13
    ·
    24 days ago

    10 tricks to speed up your cpu and trim belly fat. Electrical engineers hate them! Invest now! Start up is called ‘DefinitelyNotAScam’.