The New AMD Building Thread

Of course, you can also see it from the perspective that a PC you've designed and built with your own hands is something to cherish, be proud of and look after. Works both ways really Needless to say, I'm very fond of my PCs, but sometimes I almost wish problems (albeit not terrible ones) upon myself/others so I have something to sink my teeth into...

 

Sam,
I know exactly what you mean. Once you've digested all the latest tech, you're always looking to learn more. It's like a never ending quest for knowledge!

Russ

 

Absolutely. Rather sadly it also builds a sort of compulsive desire, or at least it does in my case. Whether or not you could actually justify it, no matter whether you would actually buy it or not, there is always a latest and greatest that you want... or maybe that's just me

 

No Sam I know how you feel. The upgrade bug has us all. I just have to remind myself I can't justify so much money. Surely with the next generation I will be making some big upgrades, but right now I seriously have no reason to do so.

 

It's not just you, I have the desire LOL!

 

we shouyld all join computer building anonymus

 

I think Afterdawn kind of IS my Computer Building Anonymous to be honest.

 

hahaha, it's more like an anti-CBA to me, reading these threads only makes me want to upgrade more often.

I was going to say that I didn't really want to do anything about this "ailment", but realized that's what the alcoholics say >_>

 

I originally posted this in the PC Building thread!

Shaff,
I do hate to burst your euphoric bubble, but Intel has gotten caught with their fingers in the cookie jar this time! Here's the real reason AMDs are so slow!

The Enquirer
http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/1567108/intel-compiler-cripples-code-amd-via-chips

The most interesting part is here. Amd is going to have a Renaissance!
http://www.osnews.com/story/22683/Intel_Forced_to_Remove_Cripple_AMD_Function_from_Compiler_

As of 01/03/10, Intel was ordered by the Courts to remove the "Cripple AMD Function" from AMD's compiler. The difference without the crippler turned on, is as high as a 47% performance gain. That's the real reason that Intel is so much faster! It's not nice to cheat! Not all chips are crippled that bad, but as the chips get faster, it cripples them even more.

I think everyone here that owns an AMD should press AMD to replace their CPUs with ones without the intentionally flawed compiler, and Intel should have to pay for each and every one of them!

I'm posting this on the AMD thread. Need I remind anyone that Intel ripped us off?

Russ

 

I've never entirely agreed with Intel's bully market practices. First the whole anti-trust law suit and now this? Can't Intel be satisfied that their stuff is already faster? I smell more law suits before this is over.

Also, likewise. If this is something that affects the CPUs themselves, I will be demanding a replacement.

The performance differences are really spelled out in games. AMDs are much closer to Intel performance-wise in gaming than they are in synthetic benchmarks. AMDs have specific instructions that make them more optimised for games. But it doesn't work AGAINST Intel.

Intel you have disappointed me. This news will delay my purchase of an i5 until I find out more.

 

I knew about the anti-AMD compiler for a while, but I don't understand this:
"I think everyone here that owns an AMD should press AMD to replace their CPUs with ones without the intentionally flawed compiler, and Intel should have to pay for each and every one of them!"
Compilers are what you write software with, not a hardware part of a CPU. Why would you need to replace your CPU? The issue is program-specific.

 

I wouldn't hold my breath with anybody replacing anything, if I was AMD knowing if I had to replace all the faulty CPU's and have to wait another 5 years or more to sue Intel which is slow as molasses in responding to anything, I sure as hell would not start replacing anything especially if it's Intel's doing.

 

I'm not convinced it is a hardware issue. I'm still pretty sure it's just software. The change isn't going to affect any old software, but the move is aimed at no new software using Intel's compiler having the same unfair advantage. It may still be, however, that programs written using the Intel compiler give Intels an advantage simply to the way the software works, but the advantage should be far smaller from now on.

 

ditto: hardware, software whatever the issue is they should be held directly responsible, and not have to use others to sue them to get action, it's called make your wrong right.

I can just see this, Intel says Oh thats an AMD issue, it's thier fault, deal with them, yeah right, knowing damn right well it's them all along, as always power corrupts.

 

The abusive company is the one with the monopoly - Intel, nvidia, Microsoft, etc. etc.

 

Sam,
My apologies! I thought it was something in the chip that triggers the code when a Genuine AMD was used. CPUID is used to tell the software how badly to cripple a chip, so I thought it had something to do with that!

This is not going to be a simple fix, by any means as many programs are made using Intel's compiler, and will need to be recompiled in order to work properly with and AMD, Via or Cyrix. I think a better solution is a program to change the CPUID to an Intel and unlock the power that way. Otherwise it's going to cost Intel a lot of money to repair the damage, not to mention lots of lawsuits from various software manufacturers, who were unwitting pawns in Intel's little scam! I know SciSoft has been accused of optimizing Sandra to favor Intel chips over AMD, and now we all know, that's not the case at all. They may have been doing just that, but were unaware of what the compiler code was doing that so drastically affected performance of non-Intel CPUs.

Russ

 

Reprogram every bit of software that's ever been made using Intel's compiler? I don't think so. It's realistically going to be a case of leaving the old software as it is, and then proceeding from this point onward in a more fair manner.

 

Sam,
As I said before, the only practical way to effectively remove the problem is to change the CPUID from AMD to Intel. That's how the problem was discovered in the first place. It would certainly be the cheapest way to do it. Someone will write a patch soon, I'm sure!

The way it is right now totally defies what our Government ordered Intel to do after Intel and AMD agreed to make nice. It's in the agreement both Intel and AMD signed, and our Government is making damn sure that the agreement is kept to our Government's satisfaction, not Intel's! Intel is dangerously close to being charged with Contempt of Court, right now. Intel feels that it has met the requirements by removing the offending code in the latest version of the compiler. Our Government has told them that that's not enough because it still leaves millions of people stuck with the problem for years to come. It would take years to resolve the problem that way, and Intel knows this! Our Government has ordered them to come up with a better plan. One that will take care of the problem for everyone, Now! They've also added an addendum to the original agreement, including Via, Cyrix and any other CPU makers in addition to AMD, to be sure that Intel get's the message, loud and clear! LOL!!

Russ

 

Personally I think that could be a bad idea, making intel pay a potentially crippling amount of money isn't going to make things any better except maybe make AMD fanboys happy. Moving forward from here is the best solution in my opinion.

Apart from that I think a lot of people are jumping to conclusions before thinking the situation over thoroughly. While I do not agree with intel on how they wrote their compiler, I have never heard of any laws stating programs had to be compiled with it or of any regarding how one is allowed to write a compiler. I've heard mixed things about Intel's claims about their compiler, and in my opinion they should have been clearer on how it worked, but it's nothing more than misleading/false advertisement at worst (not saying that isn't bad). As far as I know the compiler was developed by Intel for Intel processors and as such I can see no justification for the government interfering with the programming of the actual compiler. If people don't like how it works they can use a different one.

 

Red_Maw,
Here are the facts starting in section B, on page 10. These are the charges brought against Intel by the Federal Trade Commission last week! Please note, they have been doing this for more than 7 years. They first re-wrote the compiler in 2003 with the introduction of the Opteron for servers, to specifically slow down the Opteron's performance.
http://www.ftc.gov/os/adjpro/d9341/091216intelcmpt.pdf

The bottom line is pretty simple. No one knew of the deception, although many did know that something wasn't right, but they didn't have any proof until someone actually discovered that by changing the CPUID to a Genuine Intel, an AMD would suddenly do so much better in benchmarks. It even violates the agreement both AMD and Intel signed, along with a 1.25 Billion dollar payment for damages awarded by the Courts.

Here is the a copy of the offending part of the agreement signed by AMD and Intel, last November 9th!



Intel has removed the offending parts for their latest version of their Compiler, and considers the problem taken care of. The Federal Trade Commission wants more than that as Intel's actions will continue to affect millions of AMD users for years to come, otherwise.

I don't know how it could be any clearer than that. In the end, Intel will have to come up with some sort of patch that negates the performance hit that AMD is taking right now, with any software complied with Intel's compiler. They don't have to do anything to improve AMD's performance, and they may optimize an Intel CPU's performance, but they are not allowed to artificially do anything to harm AMD CPU's performance. I, for one can't wait to see how AMD does when the playing field is leveled!

Oh! It is not a defective compiler, Intel's actions were deliberate and designed specifically to lower the performance of non-Intel CPUs, to make their own products appear superior!

Best Regards,
Russ