Sponsor: Get 10% off Squarespace purchases (https://geni.us/BqEpf)We're benchmarking the Intel APO tool on Intel's new Core i9-14900K CPU. APO is compatible ...
Having Intel devs do manual, per game scheduling optimization seems unsustainable in the long term.
I wonder if the long term plan is to try and automate this, or use the NPU in upcoming generations to assist in scheduling.
Nvidia is a graphics card company, they need constant driver work for their cards. Intel is a CPU company for whom gaming is a minor side hustle at best.
Also, GPUs are full of sharp performance cliffs and tuning opportunities, there is a lot to be gained. CPUs are a lot more resilient and generic - a lot less to be gained there.
The “gain” is largely a weighted average over all apps, not a max realizing in couple of outliers. It’s the bulk that determines the economics of the question, not singular exceptions.
The current status is heavily dominated by the historical state of affairs, as not enough time has passed to do much yet. Complex heterogenous cache hierarchies that generalize poorly is a very recent thing in CPUs, in GPUs it was the case for decades now, and in GPUs that is not the only source of large sensitivity to tuning.
Having Intel devs do manual, per game scheduling optimization seems unsustainable in the long term.
I wonder if the long term plan is to try and automate this, or use the NPU in upcoming generations to assist in scheduling.
NVIDIA has been optimizing their drivers for specific games each month for a long time.
Nvidia is a graphics card company, they need constant driver work for their cards. Intel is a CPU company for whom gaming is a minor side hustle at best.
Also, GPUs are full of sharp performance cliffs and tuning opportunities, there is a lot to be gained. CPUs are a lot more resilient and generic - a lot less to be gained there.
APO performance uplift suggests that may not be accurate.