←back to thread

180 points onename | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0.202s | source
Show context
gdiamos ◴[] No.45898849[source]
Transmeta made a technology bet that dynamic compilation could beat OOO super scalar CPUs in SPEC.

It was wrong, but it was controversial among experts at the time.

I’m glad that they tried it even though it turned out to be wrong. Many of the lessons learned are documented in systems conferences and incorporated into modern designs, ie GPUs.

To me transmeta is a great example of a venture investment. If it would have beaten Intel at SPEC by a margin, it would have dominated the market. Sometimes the only way to get to the bottom of a complex system is to build it.

The same could be said of scaling laws and LLMs. It was theory before Dario, Ilya, OpenAI, et al trained it.

replies(7): >>45898875 #>>45899126 #>>45899335 #>>45901599 #>>45902119 #>>45903852 #>>45906222 #
pshirshov ◴[] No.45899126[source]
Aren't modern CPUs, essetially, dynamic translators from x86_64 instruction set into internal RISC-like intsruction sets?
replies(3): >>45899325 #>>45901534 #>>45901535 #
1. JoshTriplett ◴[] No.45901535[source]
Modern CPUs still translate individual instructions to corresponding micro-ops, and do a bit of optimization with adjacent micro-ops. Transmeta converted whole regions of code at a time, and I think it tried to do higher-level optimizations.