AMD presents "The Bulldozer Blog"

[tifosi]

Intel is under no obligation whatsoever to support AMD, much less produce optimal code for it. That takes effort and intimate knowledge about the caveats and errata on AMD cpus. AMD isn't willing to share that, nor support financially the development.

If you don't like Intel's compiler ( which has something like 4% market share ) , you're free to use from a plethora of others : MS, Pathscale, GCC, Sun Studio,etc.
The whole compiler thing is BS stemming from the socio-political views of those in power, liberal neo-socialists ) both US/EU, who have grand ideas of benevolence from the strong to the weak and if they don't do it willfully they will be forced. Horse manure.

I agree one hundred percent with the fact that Intel is under no obligation to support AMD or any other chip manufacturer for that matter. Given that i was planning to start something myself, i understand completely that it would suck balls for Intel to have to support AMD...

Now, please give a few minutes to read something rather important. Optimization is not the same as executing/ running the code at all. Optimization is when you tailor a certain code to work more efficiently on a given piece of hardware/ equipment. FTC has noted certain descrepancies in the compilers from Intel in that they do not run the (instruction sets) code at all on anything else than "Genuine Intel". Now this is what put Intel in soup. What Intel was doing was not using instruction sets such as SSE2, SSE 3 (and now AVX in their latest beta compilers) and blah blah supported by VIA and AMD processors... the compilers simply ran the code as if there was no support at all.

To put it simply, the current scenario is:

If Genuine Intel"{
AVX{}
}
else{}...

What is present in Intel's settlement with AMD is, "Intel would have to remove any piece of code which artificially limits performance of AMD processors"... So now the piece of code in question should ideally look like...

If AVX{
If Intel{}
else{}
}

This is not optimizing for AMD is this? This is for simply detecting support of an instruction set and execute the same, with optimized path for "Genuine Intel" processors. However, they are rather sneaky with the same dodgy behaviour persisting, which is evident what with their new beta compilers which dropped in soon after they reached the settlement with AMD.

I believe from your demeanour that you believe people at Intel to be more evolved (and hence intelligent?) than any other on this planet... Given that they're all so superlative, do you think they were a bunch of idiots to agree to such a thing?

Now FTC in their settlement with Intel have asked Intel to notify that their compilers do not run certain codes/ instruction sets (in other words are broken :P) on any other procesor than Intel's own. Which is fair... FTC didn't ask them to optimize code... only advised that they better run it, or, notify people who use it that it is broken

If you follow soccer/ football, FTC has caught Intel committing a foul, as Intel went diving and asking for a penalty. This time, they've been warned, shown a yellow card, if you like. The next time, it will be a red card. This is only fair...

Oh, yeah... just so you know... i'm typing all this using a "Genuine Intel" system