(www.tomshardware.com)

34 points dmmalam | 1 comments | 01 Sep 25 11:44 UTC | HN request time: 0s | source

Show context

arccy ◴[01 Sep 25 12:18 UTC] No.45092137[source]▶

>>45091921 (OP) #

how long until we get something like spectre for this...

snickerbockers ◴[01 Sep 25 12:27 UTC] No.45092189[source]▶

I doubt it, based on TFA it looks like it has more in common with multi-issue pipelining and ooe than speculative execution.

replies(3): >>45092435 #>>45092800 #>>45092988 #

jokoon ◴[01 Sep 25 14:38 UTC] No.45092988[source]▶

>>45092189 #

by TFA you mean the fucking article?

why swear? not I have a problem with it

replies(2): >>45093001 #>>45093978 #

1. Cthulhu_ ◴[01 Sep 25 14:41 UTC] No.45093001{3}[source]▶

>>45092988 #

I don't get it either, seems to be a HN culture thing. I get it when people reply to people who haven't read the article (like in RTFM), but it's often used unsolicited and IMO unnecessary.

↑

Intel Patents 'Software Defined Supercore'