• Kairos@lemmy.today
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    122
    ·
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    I highly doubt that unless they invented magic.

    Edit: oh… They ommitted the “up to” in the headline.

  • xantoxis@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    93
    ·
    3 months ago

    This change is likened to expanding a CPU from a one-lane road to a multi-lane highway

    This analogy just pegged the bullshit meter so hard I almost died of eyeroll.

  • Buffalox@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    43
    ·
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    Why is this bullshit upvoted?
    Already the first sentence, they change from the headline “without recoding” to “with further optimization”.
    Then the explanation “a companion chip that optimizes processing tasks in real-time”
    This is already done at compiler level and internally in any modern CPU for more than a decade.

    It might be possible to some degree for some specific forms of code, like maybe Java. But generally for the CPU this is bullshit, and the headline is decidedly dishonest.

  • rtxn@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    40
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    3 months ago

    Cybercriminals are creaming their jorts at the potential exploits this might open up.

  • Shadow@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    18
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    3 months ago

    Hmm, so sounds like they’re moving the kernel scheduler down to a hardware layer? Basically just better smp?

    • Chocrates@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      16
      ·
      3 months ago

      Processors have an execution pipeline, so a single command like mov has some number of actions the CPU takes to execute it. CPU designers already have some magic that allows them to execute these out of order as well as other stuff like pre calculating what they think the next command will probably be.

      It’s been a decade since my cpu class so I am butchering that explanation, but I think that is what they are proposing messing with

      • Kairos@lemmy.today
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        13
        ·
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        That’s accurate.

        Its done through multiple algorithms, but the general idea is to schedule calculations as soon as possible, accounting for data hazards to make sure everything is still equivalent to non out of order execution. Individual circuits can execute different things at the same time. Special hardware is needed to make the algorithms work.

        There’s also branch prediction which is the same thing kind of except the CPU needs a way to ensure if the prediction was actually correct.

  • Coasting0942@reddthat.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    17
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    3 months ago

    Others have already laughed at this idea, but on a similar topic:

    I know we’ve basically disabled a lot of features that sped up the CPU but introduced security flaws. Is there a way to turn those features back on for an airgapped computer intentionally?

  • 9point6@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    15
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    Haha okay

    Edit: after a skim and a quick Google, this basically looks like a packaging up of existing modern processor features (sorta AVX/SVE with a load of speculative execution thrown on top)

  • blahsay@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    11
    ·
    3 months ago

    10 tricks to speed up your cpu and trim belly fat. Electrical engineers hate them! Invest now! Start up is called ‘DefinitelyNotAScam’.

  • tombruzzo@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    3 months ago

    I don’t care. Intel promised 5nm 10ghz single core processors by this point and I still want it out of principle