Re: OoO execution (was: The Seymour Cray Era of Supercomputers)

Liste des GroupesRevenir à c arch 
Sujet : Re: OoO execution (was: The Seymour Cray Era of Supercomputers)
De : anton (at) *nospam* mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl)
Groupes : comp.arch
Date : 20. May 2025, 22:21:07
Autres entêtes
Organisation : Institut fuer Computersprachen, Technische Universitaet Wien
Message-ID : <2025May20.232107@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at>
References : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
User-Agent : xrn 10.11
Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> writes:
On Mon, 19 May 2025 06:22:42 GMT
anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) wrote:
The Pentium Pro (introduced 1995-11-01), HP PA-8000 (introduced
1995-11-02), and MIPS R10000 (introduced 1996-01) are the first
microprocessors which have full-blown OoO execution.
 
>
What about PPC604? It had more limited OoO resources than the 3
processors you mentioned above, esp. fewer numeber of reservation
stations, but it most certainly had reorder buffers, 16 of them.
So, by your own definitions, it should be called the first single-chip
full-blown CPU.

Yes.  The OoO nature with ROB is explained in
<https://arstechnica.com/articles/paedia/cpu/ppc-1.ars/6>.

Somehow that did not register with me earlier (even though a collegue
had a Mac with a PPC 604e IIRC).  I guess it's because Apple Marketing
is low on technical details, and if Motorola emphasized this aspect,
that did not pass the filters of the press.  Also, IIRC the
performance was not so exceptional that it would direct a spotlight at
the underlying technology, whereas the Pentium Pro with its suprising
SPECint win certainly did.  Finally, the successors of the 604 (in
particular, the PPC 7450) did not progress much further with OoO
execution and still had only mild OoO capabilities at a time when the
Pentium 4 already has a 128-entry ROB (and other structure sizes to
match).  So given the lack of ambition in the 7450, I did not even
think about the possibility that the 604 might have been the first
microprocessor with OoO execution.

- anton
--
'Anyone trying for "industrial quality" ISA should avoid undefined behavior.'
  Mitch Alsup, <c17fcd89-f024-40e7-a594-88a85ac10d20o@googlegroups.com>

Date Sujet#  Auteur
17 May21:00 * The Seymour Cray Era of Supercomputers45Thomas Koenig
17 May22:27 `* Re: The Seymour Cray Era of Supercomputers44MitchAlsup1
18 May06:46  +* Re: The Seymour Cray Era of Supercomputers33Thomas Koenig
18 May16:23  i`* Re: The Seymour Cray Era of Supercomputers32Michael S
18 May23:02  i +- Re: The Seymour Cray Era of Supercomputers1MitchAlsup1
19 May02:08  i `* Re: The Seymour Cray Era of Supercomputers30quadibloc
19 May02:56  i  `* Re: The Seymour Cray Era of Supercomputers29Lawrence D'Oliveiro
19 May04:12  i   +* Re: The Seymour Cray Era of Supercomputers17quadibloc
19 May07:22  i   i+* OoO execution (was: The Seymour Cray Era of Supercomputers)15Anton Ertl
19 May18:10  i   ii+* Re: OoO execution (was: The Seymour Cray Era of Supercomputers)8John Levine
19 May18:46  i   iii`* Re: OoO execution (was: The Seymour Cray Era of Supercomputers)7Anton Ertl
19 May20:09  i   iii +* Re: OoO execution3Ze
20 May01:04  i   iii i`* Re: OoO execution2Lawrence D'Oliveiro
20 May01:30  i   iii i `- Re: OoO execution1MitchAlsup1
21 May17:52  i   iii `* Re: OoO execution (was: The Seymour Cray Era of Supercomputers)3George Neuner
21 May18:14  i   iii  +- Re: OoO execution1Stefan Monnier
21 May18:47  i   iii  `- Re: OoO execution1moi
19 May20:08  i   ii+* Re: OoO execution3quadibloc
19 May21:04  i   iii`* Re: OoO execution2Terje Mathisen
19 May21:27  i   iii `- Re: OoO execution1Michael S
19 May21:41  i   ii`* Re: OoO execution (was: The Seymour Cray Era of Supercomputers)3Michael S
20 May01:01  i   ii +- Re: OoO execution (was: The Seymour Cray Era of Supercomputers)1Lawrence D'Oliveiro
20 May22:21  i   ii `- Re: OoO execution (was: The Seymour Cray Era of Supercomputers)1Anton Ertl
19 May08:50  i   i`- Re: The Seymour Cray Era of Supercomputers1Lawrence D'Oliveiro
19 May14:55  i   `* Re: The Seymour Cray Era of Supercomputers11Michael S
20 May00:58  i    `* Re: The Seymour Cray Era of Supercomputers10Lawrence D'Oliveiro
20 May11:45  i     `* Re: The Seymour Cray Era of Supercomputers9Michael S
20 May17:59  i      +- Re: The Seymour Cray Era of Supercomputers1MitchAlsup1
20 May20:59  i      `* Re: The Seymour Cray Era of Supercomputers7John Levine
20 May23:48  i       +- Re: The Seymour Cray Era of Supercomputers1MitchAlsup1
21 May09:21  i       `* Re: The Seymour Cray Era of Supercomputers5Michael S
21 May09:44  i        +- Re: The Seymour Cray Era of Supercomputers1Lawrence D'Oliveiro
21 May17:09  i        `* Re: The Seymour Cray Era of Supercomputers3John Levine
21 May18:11  i         `* Re: The Seymour Cray Era of Supercomputers2Michael S
21 May21:04  i          `- Re: The Seymour Cray Era of Supercomputers1John Levine
18 May09:33  `* Re: The Seymour Cray Era of Supercomputers10Michael S
18 May23:01   `* Re: The Seymour Cray Era of Supercomputers9MitchAlsup1
19 May14:35    `* Re: The Seymour Cray Era of Supercomputers8Michael S
19 May17:49     +- Re: The Seymour Cray Era of Supercomputers1Al Kossow
19 May19:14     `* Re: The Seymour Cray Era of Supercomputers6MitchAlsup1
19 May21:11      +* Re: The Seymour Cray Era of Supercomputers2Michael S
20 May07:36      i`- Re: The Seymour Cray Era of Supercomputers1BGB
20 May06:40      `* Re: The Seymour Cray Era of Supercomputers3Lawrence D'Oliveiro
20 May17:58       `* Re: The Seymour Cray Era of Supercomputers2MitchAlsup1
21 May01:28        `- Re: The Seymour Cray Era of Supercomputers1Lawrence D'Oliveiro

Haut de la page

Les messages affichés proviennent d'usenet.

NewsPortal