| ▲ | slimginz 4 days ago | |
IIRC There was a Jim Keller interview a few years ago where he said basically the same thing (I think it was from right around when he joined Tenstorrent?). The ISA itself doesn't matter, it's just instructions. The way the chip interprets those instructions is what makes the difference. ARM was designed from the beginning for low powered devices whereas x86 wasn't. If x86 is gonna compete with ARM (and RISC-V) then the chips are gonna need to also be optimized for low powered devices, but that can break decades of compatibility with older software. | ||
| ▲ | sapiogram 4 days ago | parent | next [-] | |
It's probably from the Lex Friendman podcast he did. And to be fair, he didn't say "it doesn't matter", he said "it's not that important". | ||
| ▲ | tester756 3 days ago | parent | prev | next [-] | |
| ▲ | BirAdam 3 days ago | parent | prev [-] | |
Jim Keller did say essentially that, and I think this is proven in two different facts. First, x86 hasn't directly executed x86 instructions in a very long time. Second, Rosetta 2. ISA doesn't matter. Logic matters. Cache matters. Branch prediction and speculative execution matter. Buffers matter. Instruction reordering matters. Node size and packaging matter. SIMD matters for some workloads. Etc. | ||