Comment by knorker 10 hours ago Oh, no vector extension. Probably a dealbreaker for me. 4 comments knorker Reply akshitgaur2005 9 hours ago why? 6SixTy 2 hours ago RISC-V Vector is roughly equivalent to MMX, SSE, and AVX. A lot of tasks without those instructions are flat out slower without. stinkbeetle 9 hours ago Well Linux distros are consolidating around RVA23 target, for one thing (I'm not OP). knorker 3 hours ago The difference in performance in the kind of compute workloads I'm interested in are so improved by SIMD/Vector that there isn't even any point evaluating non-RVV hardware.
akshitgaur2005 9 hours ago why? 6SixTy 2 hours ago RISC-V Vector is roughly equivalent to MMX, SSE, and AVX. A lot of tasks without those instructions are flat out slower without. stinkbeetle 9 hours ago Well Linux distros are consolidating around RVA23 target, for one thing (I'm not OP). knorker 3 hours ago The difference in performance in the kind of compute workloads I'm interested in are so improved by SIMD/Vector that there isn't even any point evaluating non-RVV hardware.
6SixTy 2 hours ago RISC-V Vector is roughly equivalent to MMX, SSE, and AVX. A lot of tasks without those instructions are flat out slower without.
stinkbeetle 9 hours ago Well Linux distros are consolidating around RVA23 target, for one thing (I'm not OP).
knorker 3 hours ago The difference in performance in the kind of compute workloads I'm interested in are so improved by SIMD/Vector that there isn't even any point evaluating non-RVV hardware.
why?
RISC-V Vector is roughly equivalent to MMX, SSE, and AVX. A lot of tasks without those instructions are flat out slower without.
Well Linux distros are consolidating around RVA23 target, for one thing (I'm not OP).
The difference in performance in the kind of compute workloads I'm interested in are so improved by SIMD/Vector that there isn't even any point evaluating non-RVV hardware.