Motherboard Forums


Reply
Thread Tools Display Modes

Re: VTune Event based sampling and Athlon XP

 
 
Kevin G. Rhoads
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-29-2003, 04:52 PM
VTune is made by Intel, the Athlon processor is made by
*gasp* a competitor. What do you think?

 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
idave
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-30-2003, 02:06 AM
Just about everything intel does to advance their own platforms helps AMD
already (compilers, platform design, etc.). I bet that if you use Vtune on
software written on and Intel system it will improve the performance on an
AMD system as well (maybe not as much though).

"David Schwartz" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:bg74ke$vf0$(E-Mail Removed)...
>
> "Kevin G. Rhoads" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:(E-Mail Removed)...
>
> > VTune is made by Intel, the Athlon processor is made by
> > *gasp* a competitor. What do you think?

>
> Intel wants to sell VTune. VTune is more expensive than almost any
> single Intel CPU. It would make more sense for them to support their
> competitor's CPUs to sell more copies of VTune.
>
> DS
>
>
>



 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Brent
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-30-2003, 04:20 PM

"David Schwartz" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> "Kevin G. Rhoads" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:(E-Mail Removed)...
>
> > VTune is made by Intel, the Athlon processor is made by
> > *gasp* a competitor. What do you think?

>
> Intel wants to sell VTune. VTune is more expensive than almost any
> single Intel CPU. It would make more sense for them to support their
> competitor's CPUs to sell more copies of VTune.
>
> DS


If I were in charge of Intel, I'd be giving away VTune because there's a lot
more people who buy CPUs than there are who buy, or even use, development
software.

It's in Intel's interests to have all software written running exceedingly
well on their CPUs and.. not so well on those made by their compeditors.
With all other things being equal, given a choice between an Intel cpu and a
comparitable AMD cpu which would you choose knowing that your favorite
software will run significantly faster on the Intel cpu?

But if you can get developers to pay for software which helps your company
sell more CPUs... all the better. ;/

regards,
-Brent
doomsday AT optusnet DOT com DOT au



 
Reply With Quote
 
David Schwartz
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-30-2003, 09:12 PM

"Brent" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:3f27f105$0$31924$(E-Mail Removed) u...

> If I were in charge of Intel, I'd be giving away VTune because there's a

lot
> more people who buy CPUs than there are who buy, or even use, development
> software.


However, Intel doesn't give away VTune, they charge quite a bit for it.
This suggests that your interpretation of Intel's interests is wrong. You
don't think Intel's management is stupid, do you?

> It's in Intel's interests to have all software written running exceedingly
> well on their CPUs and.. not so well on those made by their compeditors.


That's certainly true. The CPU market is much larger than the
performance tuner market.

> With all other things being equal, given a choice between an Intel cpu and

a
> comparitable AMD cpu which would you choose knowing that your favorite
> software will run significantly faster on the Intel cpu?


Except that 90% of what you do with VTune helps AMD CPUs too. Intel is
just trying to eliminate clumsy coding in a market that it controls most of.

> But if you can get developers to pay for software which helps your company
> sell more CPUs... all the better. ;/


Is it better? Doesn't it mean fewer people will performance tune their
programs for Intel CPUs? And doesn't it leave AMD room for people who have
AMD CPUs to use only an AMD performance tuner?

I'm afraid your analysis leads to inconsistencies.

Put it this way. Assume that VTune only (or mostly) tells you about
things that cause performance problems on Intel CPUs. And assume that there
are far more users than devlopers. Why should Intel particularly care what
processors developers use? Wouldn't they rather developers with AMD CPUs
could still optimize code to run better on Intel CPUS?

DS



 
Reply With Quote
 
Brent
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-31-2003, 04:34 PM

"David Schwartz" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:bg9cc7$94g$(E-Mail Removed)...
>
> "Brent" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:3f27f105$0$31924$(E-Mail Removed) u...
>
> > If I were in charge of Intel, I'd be giving away VTune because there's a

> lot
> > more people who buy CPUs than there are who buy, or even use,

development
> > software.

>
> However, Intel doesn't give away VTune, they charge quite a bit for

it.
> This suggests that your interpretation of Intel's interests is wrong.


Or that I'm not particularly good managerial material.

> You
> don't think Intel's management is stupid, do you?


Not in the slightest. Intel's primary product is CPUs, but if they can make
a bit of money on the side by selling software which helps them maintain, or
even increase, their market share, it makes sense to do so. And developers
will (obviously ) pay for it because it'll give them an edge over their
compeditor's unoptimized software. IMO, this is where my managerial
failings show. It makes sence to, as far as possible, force developers to
choose an expensive development suite for either Intel or AMD, not both as
the case would be if both VTune and CodeAnalyst were free. As a
professional developer it's logical to optimize for the vast majority of
one's potential customers.

> > It's in Intel's interests to have all software written running

exceedingly
> > well on their CPUs and.. not so well on those made by their compeditors.

>
> That's certainly true. The CPU market is much larger than the
> performance tuner market.
>
> > With all other things being equal, given a choice between an Intel cpu

and
> a
> > comparitable AMD cpu which would you choose knowing that your favorite
> > software will run significantly faster on the Intel cpu?

>
> Except that 90% of what you do with VTune helps AMD CPUs too. Intel is
> just trying to eliminate clumsy coding in a market that it controls most

of.

Fair enough, both have some optimization rules in common. But where they
differ it'll benefit Intel CPUs over AMD, and thus provides a net benefit to
Intel.

> > But if you can get developers to pay for software which helps your

company
> > sell more CPUs... all the better. ;/

>
> Is it better?


It's better to sell product A and product B rather than just A or B. It's
"better" for Intel that way.

> Doesn't it mean fewer people will performance tune their
> programs for Intel CPUs?


Overall, yes.

> And doesn't it leave AMD room for people who have
> AMD CPUs to use only an AMD performance tuner?


Sure, but programmers using AMD CPUs to optimize for people using AMD CPUs
are in a minority. Someone who writes a comparitable program specifically
optimized for Intel CPUs will, all other things being equal, have a larger
market. In software, market share tends to reinforce itself.

> I'm afraid your analysis leads to inconsistencies.


I honestly don't believe it does, but entirely respect your right to
disagree. I can't prove (till I get my ESP software working ) that my
cynical take is more accurate than yours. You're right when you say that
performance tuning software helps improve the overall standard of software
written, but don't believe that either Intel or AMD are doing it for
altruistic reasons.

> Put it this way. Assume that VTune only (or mostly) tells you about
> things that cause performance problems on Intel CPUs. And assume that

there
> are far more users than devlopers. Why should Intel particularly care what
> processors developers use?


IMO, in the grand scheme of things... they don't.

It might be worth mentioning that any software which I write, if it's
optimized at all, is optimized towards whichever machine I currently own.
But then, I don't write software for a living so it doesn't serve as a
particularly relevent example unless I happen to write the next killer app
which everyone just has to have. Don't hold your breath Even so, if I'm
representative of hobby programmers it'd be marginally beneficial for any
given CPU manufacturer to corner the market... just in case.

> Wouldn't they rather developers with AMD CPUs
> could still optimize code to run better on Intel CPUS?


Yes, but not at the cost of giving developers the choice to optimize for
both AMD and Intel CPUs, and giving users of said software a choice over
which CPU they'll buy to get their software to run best.

Intel has the larger market share. The situation where you can only use
development software made by company X on CPUs made by company X, to
performance tune software for CPU made by company X has got to benefit the
company who already has the larger market share to begin with.

regards,
-Brent
doomsday AT optusnet DOT com DOT au



 
Reply With Quote
 
David Schwartz
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-31-2003, 08:04 PM

"Brent" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:3f2945ed$0$3865$(E-Mail Removed) ...

> Intel has the larger market share. The situation where you can only use
> development software made by company X on CPUs made by company X, to
> performance tune software for CPU made by company X has got to benefit the
> company who already has the larger market share to begin with.


Except the only difference between the two scenarios is that if VTune
doesn't run on AMD CPUs, developers using AMD CPUs can't make software run
better on Intel CPUs.

This might mean a few more developers buy Intel CPUs, but that's
negligible. What it does mean is that some software won't run as well on
Intel CPUs, and that's not negligible.

DS



 
Reply With Quote
 
Michael Brown
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-01-2003, 08:04 AM
"Brent" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:3f2945ed$0$3865$(E-Mail Removed) ...
>
> "David Schwartz" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:bg9cc7$94g$(E-Mail Removed)...

<snip>
> > You
> > don't think Intel's management is stupid, do you?

>
> Not in the slightest. Intel's primary product is CPUs, but if they can

make
> a bit of money on the side by selling software which helps them maintain,

or
> even increase, their market share, it makes sense to do so. And

developers
> will (obviously ) pay for it because it'll give them an edge over their
> compeditor's unoptimized software. IMO, this is where my managerial
> failings show. It makes sence to, as far as possible, force developers to
> choose an expensive development suite for either Intel or AMD, not both as
> the case would be if both VTune and CodeAnalyst were free. As a
> professional developer it's logical to optimize for the vast majority of
> one's potential customers.


Note that CodeAnalyst is free, as is the recently-released AMD math library
(in the case of Intel, last time I checked both were quite expensive).

<snip>
--
Michael Brown
www.emboss.co.nz : OOS/RSI software and more
Add michael@ to emboss.co.nz - My inbox is always open


 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
How does Intel's VTune works? joggingsong@gmail.com Embedded 0 08-08-2006 07:47 AM
Intel VTune Performance Analyzer Bob Laptops 0 02-14-2005 01:10 AM
Re: VTune Event based sampling and Athlon XP Michael Brown Intel 2 07-31-2003 02:30 PM
Re: VTune Event based sampling and Athlon XP jacob navia Intel 3 07-31-2003 08:50 AM
Re: VTune Event based sampling and Athlon XP Shuttie Intel 0 07-29-2003 03:05 PM


All times are GMT. The time now is 05:14 AM.


Welcome!
Welcome to Motherboard Point
 

Advertisment