Deutsch English Français Italiano |
<usrgcs$qea8$1@dont-email.me> View for Bookmarking (what is this?) Look up another Usenet article |
Path: ...!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Thomas Koenig <tkoenig@netcologne.de> Newsgroups: comp.arch Subject: Re: What integer C type to use Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2024 06:17:01 -0000 (UTC) Organization: A noiseless patient Spider Lines: 17 Message-ID: <usrgcs$qea8$1@dont-email.me> References: <upq0cr$6b5m$1@dont-email.me> <uqobhv$3o4m9$2@dont-email.me> <1067c5b46cebaa18a0fc50fc423aa86a@www.novabbs.com> <uqpngc$3o4m9$3@dont-email.me> <uqpuid$bhg0$1@dont-email.me> <2024Feb17.190353@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at> <uqqvkc$i2cu$1@dont-email.me> <uqvk2o$1snbf$1@dont-email.me> <ur0ka6$23ma8$1@dont-email.me> <dd9c82c9be34460dc6fea35c8608e51d@www.novabbs.org> <2024Feb20.083240@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at> <2024Feb20.130029@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at> <ur2jpf$2j800$1@dont-email.me> <2024Feb20.184737@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at> <uraof0$kij0$1@newsreader4.netcologne.de> <3a1c5c42222d44ea006bc20d55e0c94c@www.novabbs.org> <urfcgs$1rne2$1@dont-email.me> <dbaa17babbd2ca8362fad9f9ecd4b79c@www.novabbs.org> <usp9un$7pij$1@dont-email.me> <20240312144428.000063f5@yahoo.com> Injection-Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2024 06:17:01 -0000 (UTC) Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="650ffe840b646e1f9e8b5eb2bbdb0a5d"; logging-data="866632"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19iePhz727zEMkxL4eDuZuNkgQywXPF+y4=" User-Agent: slrn/1.0.3 (Linux) Cancel-Lock: sha1:aB/SnvXufiCMiBdFM6PUOGVwH6o= Bytes: 2452 Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> schrieb: > Even for Cray/NEC-style vectors, the same throughput for different > precision is not an universal property. Cray's and NEC's vector > processors happen to be designed like that, but one can easily imagine > vector processors of similar style that have 2 or even 3 times higher > throughput for SP vs DP. > I personally never encountered such machines, but would be surprised if > it were never built and sold back by one or another usual suspect (may > be, Fujitsu?) in days when designers liked Cray's style. I worked on such a machine, and (IIRC) single precision was faster on that machine. That may have been due to the comparatively low memory throughput of the single load/store pipeline that it had. But it's been a few decades, and my memory may be off (and I don't have any handbooks from the time).