[SemanticStrengh]

Please stop spreading this fallacy, while downclocking can happen, usually the benefit is still strong and superior to avx256. Even 256 can induce downclocking. AVX 512 when properly utilized simply demolish non AVX 512 cpus.

[vlovich123]

On that one task. The challenge is if the avx512 pieces aren’t a bottleneck in every single concurrent workload you run. It’s fine if the most important thing your running on them is code optimized for AVX512. Realistically though, is that the case for the target market of CPUs capable of AVX512, since consumer use cases aren’t? The predominant workload would be cloud right? Where you’re running heterogeneous workloads right? You’d have to get real smart by coalescing AVX512 and non AVX512 workloads onto separate machines and disabling it on the machines that don’t need it. Very complicated work to do because you’d have to have each workload annotated by hand (memcpy is optimized to use AVX512 when available so the presence of AVX512 in the code is insufficient)

The more generous interpretation is that Intel fixed that issue a while back although the CPUs with that problem are still in rotation and you have to think about that when compiling your code.