Nope. I pointed out that the situation with PhysX and Mantle is the same. They are both held back by their owners, not developers, because of the nature of proprietary software. So stop going off on a tangent, trying to make this into something out isn't.
-
Competitor rules
Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.
Revolutionary CPU design "VISC" to make threading transparent, solve IPC woes
- Thread starter Orangey
- Start date
Nope. I pointed out that the situation with PhysX and Mantle is the same. They are both held back by their owners, not developers, because of the nature of proprietary software. So stop going off on a tangent, trying to make this into something out isn't.
I didn't say you made a connection. As I've said already, I'm pointing out that your logic is inconsistent because the Mantle and PhysX situations are very very similar. You're pretending that they're completely different and bare no resemblance.
I didn't say it's such a problem, i pointed it out, and suggested you try and be more consistent. If it wasn't a problem on your end, why did you have a moan about it, claim you don't care but keep talking about it anyway?
It's hardly like I'm singing AMD's praises and making up excuses for Mantle now is it?
It's hardly like I'm singing AMD's praises and making up excuses for Mantle now is it?
"At least try to be consistent" tone and language suggests its a problem for you.
Never said I didn't care, I said I was curious as to why it was a problem.
And now we get to the root of it.
You were being inconsistent, I suggested you be more consistent. How are you struggling to understand? It's not a problem for me, I'm not the one being inconsistent...
Asking who cares strongly suggests that you don't care and think others wouldn't either.
Ahh the good old straw man. Do you notice how I'm NOT defending Mantle? I think both Mantle and PhysX are currently in a bit of a state and their proprietary statuses get in the way of them picking up traction. You know how it is, stop playing dumb.
You accuse me of a strawman but lets be honest here, if I'd posted about any 2 other companies you wouldn't have brought me up on it.
Soldato
- Joined
- 21 Jul 2005
- Posts
- 21,104
- Location
- Officially least sunny location -Ronskistats
Labelling again in the forum? No this never happens.
Let's be grown up and move on..
Let's be grown up and move on..
So from reading this thread ... The VISC thing introduces pointless of topic arguments to the cpu?
More seriously, I will believe this when I see something more tangible. I'll be surprised if this actually comes to fruition.
More seriously, I will believe this when I see something more tangible. I'll be surprised if this actually comes to fruition.
Soldato
- Joined
- 21 Jul 2005
- Posts
- 21,104
- Location
- Officially least sunny location -Ronskistats
Basically that Woden.
The fillers of posts here tend to be tit-for-tat from old animosities of yesteryear or stabbing someone as they bat for the other team (in their heads).
The fillers of posts here tend to be tit-for-tat from old animosities of yesteryear or stabbing someone as they bat for the other team (in their heads).
I don't think so, if it was they failed miserably.
The idea behind Bulldozer and the modular architecture was efficient use of die space by picking and choosing parts, with AMD deciding what to boost and what to gimp... in a truly multicore processor everything is duplicated throughout.
By the sound of this VISC architecture it will be seen as a single core processor at the OS level, if it works I imagine Intel will be buying them out fairly shortly.
Yes, because pointing out inconsistent logic is so wrong, that's also because some mods don't do their job properly and allow the trolls to get away with all sorts. One of the graphics card mods is on another forum encouraging the behaviour he's supposed to moderate here, and being all chummy with the resident trolls to the graphics section, which is why there's nothing ever done about them.
I don't think so, if it was they failed miserably.
The idea behind Bulldozer and the modular architecture was efficient use of die space by picking and choosing parts, with AMD deciding what to boost and what to gimp... in a truly multicore processor everything is duplicated throughout.
By the sound of this VISC architecture it will be seen as a single core processor at the OS level, if it works I imagine Intel will be buying them out fairly shortly.
I do remember early press releases stating they were trying to process one thread with two cores and have the ability to switch depending on the task at hand. We are talking just post phenom 2 speculation articles about sometime around excavators release tho (so kind of like skylake speculation articles today). I think martini is right in that it was a stated aim..... although its obvious it was well beyond reach of what bulldozer eventually did.
Soldato
- Joined
- 21 Jul 2005
- Posts
- 21,104
- Location
- Officially least sunny location -Ronskistats
Are you guys comparing this to a three year+ tech though?
If AMD are ditching their architecture for something better then it would sound like a confusing choice.
If AMD are ditching their architecture for something better then it would sound like a confusing choice.
No we are saying this was rumoured or mentioned before bulldozers release. So its either been in dev for a while and there's something behind it or its a theoretical ambition that's becoming more realised.
Either way we won't know until it has a public working demo.
Either way we won't know until it has a public working demo.