Intel will disable support for AVX-512 on Alder Lake processors.

Ironic as it was a good propaganda argument versus other CPU brand that have a lack of AVX-512...

 

Same thoughts here, also they used to mock synthetic benchmarks - and all of a sudden they're bragging about CB scores etc.

 

I remember when intel stole my TSX NI instruction from 4790K. Yes it did because I bought this CPU from tsx ni.
And it gave me an advantage in the RPCS3 emulator, not the benchmark

 

Not really. I've always seen AVX-512 as nothing more than just a means to make Intel seem like they're not just sitting there doing nothing. It's technology for the sake of technology. It takes up a huge chunk of each core, which contributes significantly toward manufacturing costs. It draws so much power that it makes Intel's performance-per-watt underwhelming, and, cranks up the heat. It's a little too niche to ever be widely adopted.

The only people who were impressed by this are those who like to see more/bigger things on paper but completely ignore real-world results. Granted, AVX-512 has so little real-world impact on today's software that it makes me wonder why Intel cared so much about disabling it.

 

I think it was a stop-gap effort to compete with GPUs in niche workloads. Intel saw Nvidia/AMD shifting their GPUs for specific compute tasks, they had AVX-512 from larabee/phi - they repurposed and fixed it up and shoved it on their CPUs to try to maintain some relevance of competition in those spaces but ultimately kind of pointless. I think once Intel gets a competitive discrete GPU out, you'll see AVX-512 go EOL.

That being said it does seem nice for the 3 people that are doing like 5 billion layers of audio processing or running PS3 emulators lol

 

as far as im aware, disabling a feature once its been confirmed to work regardless of whether the feature is advertised is illegal.

 

Ahhh, yes. It's really impressive for PS3 emulator...

 

Best someone tell that to Sony then they do it all the time

 

sony make you agree to feature changes in the update license you agree to before performing the update, you get no such luxury with bios updates.

 

Are intel bios updates forced?

 

how exactly are they gona "force" a bios update? those are general thing the user would have to do and most dont out side power users and most then dont

 

Microcode updates are generally included in OS updates as well, along with BIOS updates.

 

can it be disable via microcode? if so it would require INTEL to push it to MS and have MS them selves push is

How like is MS to do that IF it not security realated?

 

AVX-512 wasn't exactly received well by some devs. Torvalds wished it a "painful death":

https://www.zdnet.com/article/linus-torvalds-i-hope-intels-avx-512-dies-a-painful-death/

 

Torvalds is an angry bitter sensationalist who can't seem to understand why Linux is only welcome on routers and nas devices.

 

yup
it's a little strange to me that people actually comment on the feature.as fas as i know it's not that important for most of us.
what's more striking is whether they have become so accustomed to intel doing intel things like this ? cause to me it seems intel just cannot do that.period.

 

He's also an expert and knows what he's talking about.

 

Pft no they don't infact I've never seen a list of feature changes when updating my TV it's not till after it's done that I find out that crap's now missing

 

He's not an expert in anything, else he'd be building cpu's instead of the software that runs on them.