Does touching MMX still obligate you to `emms` at some point?
-
-
Yuuuup. But fortunately there's no reason to use MMX, ever, on hw that support SSE2.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Well I was thinking the need to `emms` kills a lot of MMX's theoretical value as a spilling ground
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Oh, definitely. You should never use MMX. But the perf issues apply equally to using SSE as spilling ground.
2 replies 0 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @stephentyrone @jckarter and
It’s weird how scalar operations are fast, HW F32x4 is fast (SSE2), HW F32x8 is fast (AVX2), HW F32x16 is fast (AVX-512), but HW F32x2 is slow (MMX).
3 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
MMX doesn't do F32. 8, 16, and 32-bit integers.
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @stephentyrone @pcwalton and
Have we forgotten 3Dnow! so quickly?
1 reply 0 retweets 4 likes -
Even AMD has forgotten about 3Dnow!
1 reply 0 retweets 5 likes -
Replying to @stephentyrone @jckarter and
they should have shoehorned it into AMD64 so Intel would have been forced to support it
2 replies 0 retweets 6 likes -
Replying to @hikari_no_yume @jckarter and
Special shout-out to the utterly bizarre "reciprocal iteration step part 1", "reciprocal square root iteration step part 1", and "reciprocal and reciprocal square root iteration steps part 2" instructions.
2 replies 0 retweets 7 likes
At least 3DNow! PAVGUSB would have been better than SSE PAVGB for my PNG decoder because the former doesn’t round up
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.