|
|
|
|
|
by dragontamer
1373 days ago
|
|
Or... supercomputer users don't care about latency in GCN/CDNA applications. 500ns to access main memory, and lol 120 nanoseconds to access L1 cache is pretty awful. CPUs can access RAM in less latency than Vega/GCN can access L1 cache. Indeed, RDNA's main-memory access is approaching Vega/GCN's L2 latency. ---------- This has to be an explicit design decision on behalf of AMD's team to push GFLOPS higher and higher. But as I stated earlier: video game programmers want faster latency on their shaders. "More like NVidia", as you put it. Seemingly, the supercomputer market is willing to put up with these bad latency scores. |
|
We're not talking here about the latency that gamers care about, the one that's measured in milliseconds.
I've never seen any literature that complained about load/store access latency in the shader core. It's just so low level...