• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

AVX-512 What software use AVX-512?

R

rwnrwnn7

Member
AVX-512 What software use AVX-512?

this is a new set of commands from Intel
1. which programs use this command set?
 
Latest builds of X264 have some preliminary support in them.
5-10% performance improvement over AVX2, depending on the used preset currently (according to the devs).
 
The Stilt said:
Latest builds of X264 have some preliminary support in them.
5-10% performance improvement over AVX2, depending on the used preset currently (according to the devs).
Click to expand...
from your all around deep knowledge what do you think is the realistic advantage of AVX512 over AVX2?

thanks
 
rwnrwnn7 said:
thanks
Is AMD allowed to use these commands ( 512 ) ?
Or do they have similar / another name?
Click to expand...

In theory they could add support for AVX512, however there isn't any performance benefit from doing so (more likely a small penalty, similar to AVX2) without increasing the resources in the core.
 
rwnrwnn7 said:
I did not understand what " resource "
in theory AVX-512 should bring 100% over AVX2 ?
Click to expand...
You have to have dedicated pipelines for processing this kind of work and basically an answer sheet.

SkyLake-X includes only a fraction of AVX-512 (which is another problem with AVX-512) and the "answer sheet" is alone the size of a whole Atom core. AVX-512 also takes up close to 20% of each core. This is for functionality almost non-existant in the open world meant for HPC and other super high end processing.

Add into the effect that AVX2 has over AVX and AVX 512 over AVX2 in power and temperature (and clock speeds without the offset) and you can see why AMD didn't even do AVX2 straight up and went for combining AVX units for AVX2.

That is the resource usage. Tons of space, increased power usage, increased temps, lower clocks.
 
rwnrwnn7 said:
I did not understand what " resource "
in theory AVX-512 should bring 100% over AVX2 ?
Click to expand...
There is supposed to be no difference in theory and practice, but in practice there is. 100% more performance over AVX2 would only happen ideally in something like LINPACK.

AVX512 advantages over AVX2 in practically useful work is extremely limited in both applicability and performance.
 
Carfax83 said:
AVX512VL should allow AVX512 to be much more practical and useful in general computing.

Of course this will take years to manifest unfortunately.
Click to expand...
AVX512 Integer performance is still only 20 (or 40, can't remember) percent over AVX2, according to Sandra. As for FP, it's still limited to array or matrix operations as long as they don't run into memory bottlenecks, and in isolation. Fawning over big performance deltas in MKL FFT/LINPACK isn't really what you'd call an example of overall usefulness. When software is written with varying degrees of competence when it comes to exposing vectorizable paths, performance is going to be all over the place. And I'm not even talking about the physical restrictions of die area, clock speeds and power consumption.

By the time 512 bit wide vector SIMD becomes useful, CPUs will already have more 128 or 256 bit execution units in the same die area to tackle the problem.
 
I doubt anyone outside Intel knows what the exact power difference is between them but AVX 512 on SL-X requires something close to a 500MHz reduction in clocks to keep TDP in line when running the code. AVX2 on KL needed something like a 300MHz offset.
 
Eric1987 said:
Why is 264 still being developed? 265 is superior in every way last time I checked.
Click to expand...

There are many devices that cannot do full HEVC/h.265 hardware decoding, be it CPUs, GPUs, mobile phones, set-top boxes, etc. Companies cannot abandon h.264 just yet, until the large majority of people's devices support h.265.

P.S. This is off-topic though.
 
eddman said:
There are many devices that cannot do full HEVC/h.265 hardware decoding, be it CPUs, GPUs, mobile phones, set-top boxes, etc. Companies cannot abandon h.264 just yet, until the large majority of people's devices support h.265.

P.S. This is off-topic though.
Click to expand...

Sorry I just really didn't know. Thought it was something I was missing and it was.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top