AMD Alleges Intel Compilers Create Slower AMD Code

[HDTVMan]

http://yro.slashdot.org/yro/05/07/12/1320202.shtml?tid=142&tid=118&tid=123

Kind of know this but makes you wonder how much faster and AMD would be if somone faked the Genuine Intel.

Can someone make something to do this that interfaces between the cpu and socket?

Wishfull thinking.

In AMD's recient anti-trust lawsuit AMD have examined the Intel compiler and found that it deliberatly runs code slower when it detects that the processor is an AMD. "To achieve this, Intel designed the compiler to compile code along several alternate code paths. ... By design, the code paths were not created equally. If the program detects a "Genuine Intel" microprocessor, it executes a fully optimized code path and operates with the maximum efficiency. However, if the program detects an "Authentic AMD" microprocessor, it executes a different code path that will degrade the program's performance or cause it to crash.""

 

[ryanv12]

The more they present as abuses in this case, the less I like Intel. I suppose in a cutthroat business environment, stifling your competition using unethical means is the highest form of flattery.

 

[n7]

Wouldn't surprise me if it's true.

Intel is teh :evil:

 

[ryanv12]

Originally posted by: n7
Wouldn't surprise me if it's true.

Intel is teh :evil:

Fo real.

Since I started lurking on these forums I have been saved from Intelism. It's sort of like a successful rehab for an alcoholic. Before I was wandering without hope in the dark, cruel world of megaherthz

Ok, somewhat exaggerated, but still.

 

[n7]

Haha Intelism...

 

[ryanv12]

Purchasing my first AMD cpu ever whenever my check clears into my bank account...sometime this week

 

[ssvegeta1010]

Wow, that just sounds horrible. I can understand all the aggresive, unethical retail stuff being done, but this just sounds even more blantantly illegal.

3 Intels, No AMD as of yet. (Receiving one soon ) I have seen the errors of my ways.

 

[IEC]

If that isn't unethical, I don't know black from white.

I just bought parts for my college SFF rig... AMD proc, ATI mobo, nVidia graphics card, reusing a Philips soundcard... no Creative or Intel for me!

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: ssvegeta1010
Wow, that just sounds horrible. I can understand all the aggresive, unethical retail stuff being done, but this just sounds even more blantantly illegal.

3 Intels, No AMD as of yet. (Receiving one soon ) I have seen the errors of my ways.

Brings tears to my eyes to see so many people waking up from the Intel brainwashing.

Now if we can only wake up 51% of America...

 

[Bona Fide]

Hm...AMD sure seems to be busting out all these allegations out of nowhere...I'm sure someone thinks that these are starting to lose their legitimacy. Even if AMD is right, they are gonna get some disrespect from the consumer community because of all this all-out warfare with Intel.

 

[ryanv12]

I think that most people don't even care what processor is sitting in their computer. From all the forums I have been on recently and computer people I've talked to, anyone who knows anything about computers is more likely to know that AMD makes a better computer. Since most people are not going to build their own computer, Intel's dominance of the OEM market ensures their success. I bet people who are buying their Dell aren't even paying attention to this at all, let alone know what processor is in their computer. At best they can distinguish if they have a Pentium 4 or a Celeron. If these anti-trust cases work, hopefully AMD will have more access to OEM builders and silently AMD can gain significant market share silently whenever Julie sees a "Dell Computer" for $300. This will also give informed computer buyers better options for recommending prebuilt computers to family members

 

[GuitarDaddy]

Originally posted by: ssvegeta1010
Wow, that just sounds horrible. I can understand all the aggresive, unethical retail stuff being done, but this just sounds even more blantantly illegal.

3 Intels, No AMD as of yet. (Receiving one soon ) I have seen the errors of my ways.

Walk towards the light, the light is good


I left the dark side 5-6yrs ago, and will never look back. It's getting harder and harder to stomach the inferior Intel machines I have to put up with at work.

 

[GuitarDaddy]

Originally posted by: Bona Fide
Hm...AMD sure seems to be busting out all these allegations out of nowhere...I'm sure someone thinks that these are starting to lose their legitimacy. Even if AMD is right, they are gonna get some disrespect from the consumer community because of all this all-out warfare with Intel.

It's way overdue IMO, AMD has quietly put up with this sh*t for years

 

[HDTVMan]

A while ago there was an guy who did programming in a binary level. As I recall he removed the check for Genuine Intel and AMD got a big performance boost. I for one thought he was full of crap but apparently it must be legit.

All hell is going to break loose.

If Intel deliberately caused instability for Genuine AMD there is going to be hell to pay.

Companies and Consumers could file suits against Intel. Tough to prove but I would imagine AMD has some binary programmers under microscope with this one.

What Applications and what else has been degraded or worse made unstable.

 

[coomar]

Originally posted by: Bona Fide
Hm...AMD sure seems to be busting out all these allegations out of nowhere...I'm sure someone thinks that these are starting to lose their legitimacy. Even if AMD is right, they are gonna get some disrespect from the consumer community because of all this all-out warfare with Intel.

you can be counter-sued quite easily for slander, it would be dumb on the part of amd to take many of their legitimate beefs and stick them in with some weak ones, intel would counter-sue and amd would lose a lot of steam

a backlash from customers? the lawsuit alleges that intel is trying to create a monopoly, that it has consistently acted like someone out of the soprano's rather than an clean-cut corporation, that it has driven up costs (amd cpu's are cheaper so by limiting the amount of them on the market, intel is effectively increasing the cost to the customer), that is has sabotoged software (there is a huge difference between sabotage and optimization), the list goes on and on, I can in no way imagine this case going to a jury trial, the back-lash to intel would be immense

 

[HDTVMan]

Another article
http://www.swallowtail.org/naughty-intel.html

 

[AnandThenMan]

AMD Alleges Intel Compilers Create Slower AMD Code

Seems Intel's compiler also creates slow code on the Intel central processing unit.

 

[cecco]

I still remember my first two computers with the Intel Inside stickers. I thought they were the best thing money could buy. Then I began reading anandtech.

 

[Velk]

Originally posted by: ssvegeta1010
Wow, that just sounds horrible. I can understand all the aggresive, unethical retail stuff being done, but this just sounds even more blantantly illegal.

I'm not sure that it is. Manufacturers of electronics frequently do shady things to prevent you from using their competitor's products. Good example is mobile phone batteries, where the phone checks if they are the correct brand, and if not charges them slowly and to max of 50% and other assorted nastiness.

Also consider the following as a really easy example - if you create a compiler and know that your CPU can perform a specific set of operations faster if you invert them, and then make it invert them if your CPU is detected, do you have any particular duty of care to check whether your competition's CPU will run them faster inverted as well ?

It could well be that inverting them makes them go *slower* on the other CPU, so *not* making the check for cpu before doing cpu specific optimisations would actually make code run worse on your competitior's hardware.

That's not to say that they did not deliberately set out to sabotage AMD performance, but that it does different things for different CPUs is not, in and of itself, evidence of that.

 

[Duvie]

Originally posted by: Velk

Originally posted by: ssvegeta1010
Wow, that just sounds horrible. I can understand all the aggresive, unethical retail stuff being done, but this just sounds even more blantantly illegal.

I'm not sure that it is. Manufacturers of electronics frequently do shady things to prevent you from using their competitor's products. Good example is mobile phone batteries, where the phone checks if they are the correct brand, and if not charges them slowly and to max of 50% and other assorted nastiness.

Also consider the following as a really easy example - if you create a compiler and know that your CPU can perform a specific set of operations faster if you invert them, and then make it invert them if your CPU is detected, do you have any particular duty of care to check whether your competition's CPU will run them faster inverted as well ?

It could well be that inverting them makes them go *slower* on the other CPU, so *not* making the check for cpu before doing cpu specific optimisations would actually make code run worse on your competitior's hardware.

That's not to say that they did not deliberately set out to sabotage AMD performance, but that it does different things for different CPUs is not, in and of itself, evidence of that.

Well all they have to say is the pattern fits to the other long list of unethical things....I hope they have a few programmers in their left pocket to testify.....

You really should read more about it form tech guys and then think if this was an honest mistake of a company not knowing how it will do on the competitors chip....I dont think so...

 

[SketchMaster]

Originally posted by: cecco
I still remember my first two computers with the Intel Inside stickers. I thought they were the best thing money could buy. Then I began reading anandtech.

Now thats a Sig if I ever saw one.


I thought of something funny. What if AMD drives intel into the ground and then becomes the big CPU company that Intel is now. And then 10-20 years down the road a small company starts to make CPUs and before long they start to stir things up by making cheaper and faster CPUs like AMD has. And then AMD starts doing the same nasty tricks that Intel is doing now?

And on and on it goes...

 

[Furen]

First off, it doesnt matter if AMD would do the same thing if it was in Intel's shoes, it is not and the point of the matter is that Intel is doing it to it to keep AMD under control and AMD is not. Every person can potentially be a murderer but you dont let murderers get away with it just because of this. Now, I'm not saying that what Intel is doing is anything even close to murder. Hell, I'm not even sure that everything Intel's doing is illegal, it SOUNDS illegal but I dont think I know enough to make the call myself, and, even if it is, it will be hard as hell to prove. Good luck to AMD if it will lead to cheaper cpus in the future. :beer:

 

[SketchMaster]

I wasn't saying that AMD would do that, I was just thinking out loud.

 

[BillyBobJoel71]

i am seeing how amd cpus are better by reading this. the only problem is that the two at my dad's house are 3400+ ones but they are slow... i must play on one that is fast and is better than my p4.

 

[Velk]

Originally posted by: Duvie

Originally posted by: Velk

Originally posted by: ssvegeta1010
Wow, that just sounds horrible. I can understand all the aggresive, unethical retail stuff being done, but this just sounds even more blantantly illegal.

I'm not sure that it is. Manufacturers of electronics frequently do shady things to prevent you from using their competitor's products. Good example is mobile phone batteries, where the phone checks if they are the correct brand, and if not charges them slowly and to max of 50% and other assorted nastiness.

Also consider the following as a really easy example - if you create a compiler and know that your CPU can perform a specific set of operations faster if you invert them, and then make it invert them if your CPU is detected, do you have any particular duty of care to check whether your competition's CPU will run them faster inverted as well ?

It could well be that inverting them makes them go *slower* on the other CPU, so *not* making the check for cpu before doing cpu specific optimisations would actually make code run worse on your competitior's hardware.

That's not to say that they did not deliberately set out to sabotage AMD performance, but that it does different things for different CPUs is not, in and of itself, evidence of that.

Well all they have to say is the pattern fits to the other long list of unethical things....I hope they have a few programmers in their left pocket to testify.....

You really should read more about it form tech guys and then think if this was an honest mistake of a company not knowing how it will do on the competitors chip....I dont think so...

Given the original post didn't actually contain any other information, that was all I had to go on. Reading the slashdot article though, someone provided the helpful link of swallowtail, which reads as very, very damning from an ethical point of view.

I am still not sure that it is actually illegal though, but as far as supporting the case that intel is trying to deliberately sabotage them, I think they have that one nailed.