Apple iPad 2 As Fast As the Cray-2 Supercomputer 231
An anonymous reader writes "Presenting at the IEEE High Performance Extreme Computing conference, a researcher from the University of Tennessee presented evidence that the iPad 2 is as fast as the original Cray-2 supercomputer. Performance improvements were made to the iPad 2 LINPACK software by writing Python for generating and testing various Assembly routines. The researcher also found that the ARM Cortex-A9 easily beats the NVIDIA/AMD GPUs and latest Intel/AMD workstation CPUs in performance-per-Watt efficiency."
My wristwatch (Score:4, Informative)
Is more powerful than the Atanasoff machine [wikipedia.org]!
Re:My wristwatch (Score:5, Insightful)
Other things that are as fast as Cray 2 supercomputer - about a million ancient PCs... but putting Apple in the title suddenly makes this news.
remember the i486? whips the Cray-1 (Score:3, Informative)
you need to remember, however, that the software for these consumer devices is nowhere close to that on the Crays. no optimization is done any more... for you script kiddies, "optimization" means you manually with the assembly language, or automatically in the compiler, try several things and pick the one that uses the least memory/processor cycles/OSPF if multithreaded/whatever based on what you want to gain by optimizing code. all this "include.kitchensink" stuff just packs in extra code crap in case an
Re:remember the i486? whips the Cray-1 (Score:5, Interesting)
Oh - you mean like every JVM/CLR in the last I can't remember how long? Like you get in every Android [blogspot.com] device? Like all the decent JS engines out there?
Now we could discuss the relative efficiencies of interpreted vs bytecode vs compiled vs whatever all day long (hint: it's more variable [tirania.org] than it might at first seem), but I have a feeling you'd rather go back out and shout at the kids on your lawn.
Re: (Score:3)
The Samsung Galaxy SIII is faster than four Cray Y-MPs (or a couple of billion HP45 calculators)... at least if you're not too particularly about how your GFLOPS are served up. It's also got memory, unless you upgraded to the Y-MP M90. And uses quite a bit less power. That's 24 years for ya!
Nothing particularly useful or interesting about such observations, I suppose, unless you put the name "Apple" in the title. Or maybe just an Apple fan's way of dealing with the iPad 2 not being a terribly fast device, a
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Your R is not C. Carmack put the iPad 2 at roughly half the performance of the 360 [techdigest.tv], which puts the "Retina iPad" right in the ballpark of the 360, although with twice the working RAM.
Re:My wristwatch (Score:5, Informative)
According to wikipedia, the GPU in the XBox 360 puts out 240 GFLOPS [wikipedia.org]. The CPU is harder to nail down, but it seems to have a peak around 115 [xbox-scene.com] GFLOPS.
The iPad 3 has a CPU that, from what I hear, has a peak capacity of 1.5 GFLOPS. The SGX 543MP2 in the new iPad 3 has 4 cores and does 6.4 GFLOPS per core, per 200 MHz [wikipedia.org]. If we assume the 4 cores are clocks at 600 Mhz, that would mean the GPU output would be, in theory, 77.6 GFLOPS.
In short, whatever Carmack was thinking or testing, he sure wasn't hitting the peak performance of the Xbox - the console is still leagues ahead of the mobile CPUs and GPUs, and it's 7 years old.
Re: (Score:3)
Not in a practical way, though. The iPad Don't-Call-Me-3 has twice the GPU performance (SGX 543MP4 vs. SGX 543MP2), but four times the pixels to paint.
Re:My wristwatch (Score:5, Informative)
Yeah, and my bicycle smokes any Ferrari... in miles per calorie efficiency.
The iPad2 is the second coming of Christ, we got it already.
Obviously. (Score:5, Funny)
9.80665 m/s^2
Re: (Score:2)
9.80665 m/s^2
I think yours is a case of normal gravity.
Thus no doctor is needed.
Re:Obviously. (Score:5, Funny)
I think the Cray will have a higher terminal velocity than the iPad
Re: (Score:3)
I think the Cray will have a higher terminal velocity than the iPad
Now that's a race I want to see.
Re: (Score:2)
Apple's legal team should join in to ensure the race is fair.
Re: (Score:3)
Nah, I bet the Cray wins. The iPad is probably both denser *and* more aerodynamic.
"Cray Outperforms iPad in Crucial Terminal Speed Tests"
Re: (Score:3)
The surface area of an elephant is much higher than the surface area of a feather and yet it has a higher terminal velocity.
Absolute surface area is not important, it is the surface area to mass ratio and aerodynamics. I'm willing to bet that the surface area to mass ratio of the Cray 2 is much lower than that of the iPad because surface area increases with the square of length but mass increases with the cube of length. Also, surface area to mass ratio depends on the shape of the object. A flat tablet s
My desktop computer is way more powerful than that (Score:5, Insightful)
Seriously.
Re:My desktop computer is way more powerful than t (Score:5, Informative)
And in other news, the Asus Transformer Prime is 4x as fast as the Cray. Android (NVIDIA Tegra 3 T30 1300 MHz (4 cores) ) [primatelabs.com] vs Apple (Apple A5 (32nm) 1000 MHz (2 cores) ) [primatelabs.com]
I hate how everything must be compared against Apple iProducts. I don't recall every comparisons of yesteryear being brand specific. I don't care if the iPhoneX is 2x as fast as iPhoneX-1, or the iProductY is 2x as fast as the Cray. Give me damn benchmarks or clock speed of current day standards, and not a commercial.
Re: (Score:3)
Maybe, in order to make news relevant to readers, they chose to compare to something most readers are familiar with? That's pretty much the point of analogies and comparisons.
Why do you think we ever talked about storage in terms of "Libraries of Congress" in the first place?
> Give me damn benchmarks or clock speed of
> current day standards, and not a commercial.
RTMFA! It has numbers. OF COURSE the summary has the appealing bits. Welcome to journalism. Welcome to the Internet. Welcome to the human spe
Faster than a Cray Super computer?! (Score:4, Funny)
What fanbois won't say about Apple!
Now, were's the "Imagine a Beowulf cluster of iPads!" jokes?
Re:Faster than a Cray Super computer?! (Score:4, Funny)
Their stats are iPadded.
kill the meme (Score:2)
imagine a Beowulf cluster of nuclear submarine fire-control computers...
imagine a Beowulf cluster of Beowulf clusters...
imagine a Beowulf cluster of fscks....
OMFG (Score:5, Interesting)
Oh my god. If I have to read one more BS Apple story like this on the internet, I'm going to go nuts.
Apple lovers must be stopped. They're driving ad revenue and hits to all these *retarded* articles. They keep writing them because people keep clicking on them. STOP IT people!
Maybe I should just follow "if u can't beat em, join em." I should just post "Using an iPhone gives you crabs" or "iPhone as valuable as cream of wheat" and watch the money roll in.
I just laugh. Remember that new screw hoax? They said "they just make it too easy."
Re:OMFG (Score:5, Interesting)
I just laugh. Remember that new screw hoax? They said "they just make it too easy."
Jimmy Kimmel recently went out on the street [hollywoodreporter.com] with an iPhone 4S and passed it off as the new iPhone 5 and asked people what they thought of it. Not one of them realized it was the old iPhone 4S. If that doesn't say something about the mindset of Apple's userbase, I don't know what does.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Well, you could basically do that with any other phone, and everyone who doesn't know the older generation phone will react this way.
This says more about psychology and especially trust in authority figures than anything about the iPhone or even phones for that matter.
Re:OMFG (Score:5, Informative)
Re:OMFG (Score:5, Insightful)
Ever wonder what percentage of people they interviewed actually made it on TV? It's hard to draw general conclusions from a handful of people saying stupid things on TV when saying that very stupid thing was required to get on television. Still: there is no doubt that those were some very stupid people.
Re: (Score:3)
I should have added: the subset of those people who owned iPhone 4Ses were very stupid. If you don't regularly use an iPhone 4S, then it's not so strange that you think an iPhone 4S is fast shiny and new. And it certainly doesn't say anything about the "mindset of Apple's userbase" if the people interviewed weren't iPhone users.
And if I'm reading the other comments here correctly, nobody so much as alleges that this leaves more than a single very stupid person identified by Jimmy Kimmel.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:OMFG (Score:4, Insightful)
Rick Mercer has gone out and talked to Americans and had many an interesting conversation. If that doesn't say something about the mindset of Americans, I don't know what does.
Here, watch the video if you'd like a sample: http://video.google.ca/videoplay?docid=-7111005509913775935 [google.ca]
See what I did there. I used a comedian's skit where he puts a camera in someone's face and airs the best reactions to make a point. Interesting that, wouldn't you say? Might even relate to the point you're trying to make.
Re: (Score:2)
See what I did there. I used a comedian's skit where he puts a camera in someone's face and airs the best reactions to make a point. Interesting that, wouldn't you say? Might even relate to the point you're trying to make.
Yes, I see what you did there. You missed the point. Wooshed it, you could even say. All this furvor over Apple's next product (whatever it is) is marketing. Perception equals reality for most people. They think the phone is faster because they're told it's faster, not because it is. It's like the difference between Coke and Pepsi. People insist they can tell the difference in taste, but when you take "Brown fizzy substance A" and "brown fizzy substance B" in a double-blind test, not many can.
My point was
Re: (Score:2)
They think the phone is faster because they're told it's faster, not because it is.
Actually, I think it's faster because it is faster. Or did you miss the story where it was made clear that Apple's claim of the phone being twice as fast as the 4S was confirmed?
And while your commentary on marketing is valid, the point _I_ was trying to make, which seemed to do its own woosh for you, is that you can find a collection of random people on the street that will inevitably say anything you want to further paint the image you want. Kimmell wanted to make consumers look stupid. You even backed it
Re: (Score:2)
Throw a camera in someone's face (which makes them nervous and puts them off-kilter) and tell them you're showing them the new iPhone (or anything else you want) and you're likely to get enough people who believe you to provide amusing comments allowing you to make a humorous highlight reel.
Well, with a large enough sample size, anything that would normally be improbable becomes probable. That's statistics, not human nature.
You even backed it up with your "If that doesn't say something about the mindset of Apple's userbase, I don't know what does."
Apple users are somehow more vulnerable to marketing than non-apple users. At least one company [dvorak.org] thinks so. There's any number of articles out there detailing the "cult of personality" surrounding the late Steve Jobs, and I don't know why I have to lay it out for you that Apple became big because of marketing. In technical specifications, Apple products are usually inferior
People are more marketing savvy than you think (Score:2)
They think the phone is faster because they're told it's faster, not because it is.
The new phone is actually faster, in many measurable ways. I assure you that when I get the newer phone I will be able to tell.
My point was that people who buy Apple products buy them because of brand identity
People buy things repeatedly because they liked how the older one worked and they'd like to repeat the same positive ownership experience with an updated model that has some improvement they like. It's about utility of
Re: (Score:2)
> Not one of them realized it was the old iPhone 4S.
Did that really happen? It isn't mentioned in your link-- I suspect that like a lot of these segments, they canvas for a while until they have enough idiots, and then edit the footage down to just the idiots.
I'm not saying it's impossible, though.
Re: (Score:3)
Yes, cherry-picking some rubes off the street, and getting them to play to the camera and act enthusiastic for a celebrity waving a gadget in their face, demonstrates incredible generalizations about the entire Apple userbase. Parrotting such rubbish actually says a lot more about YOUR mindset.
Do you seriously believe the same trick couldn't be pulled off with other devices?
ERH MER GERD! NOT ONE!?
The people who DID realize, were simply edited out. For all
Pretty stupid gag (Score:2, Insightful)
Jimmy Kimmel recently went out on the street with an iPhone 4S and passed it off as the new iPhone 5 and asked people what they thought of it. Not one of them realized it was the old iPhone 4S
Why would they? No-one has seen an iPhone 5, so they would be inclined to believe someone who said it was regardless of what you gave them. I didn't get the point of this at all, even as a joke it was just absurd.
I mean, a guy with a camera crew shows up and hands you an object and says it is "X" and asks for though
Re: (Score:2)
The only saving grace of the sketch were the people who pulled out their iPhone 4s for comparison and began talking about how much faster, how much lighter, cooler, the thing was. Faster, well, new uncluttered phone, but still.
Re: (Score:3)
I mean, a guy with a camera crew shows up and hands you an object and says it is "X" and asks for thoughts. Are you going to disbelieve it's what they say it is??
Sure I'll probably believe its what they say it is, but that's not the really the point. Lets assume I beleive its an iphone 5:
On the one hand If I already have a 4S in my own pocket, then I'm probably not going to gush about how this "5" is lighter than the one in my pocket. Nor gush about how much faster it is. Nor gush about how much thinner it
Re:OMFG (Score:5, Informative)
Re:OMFG (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Apple lovers must be stopped. They're driving ad revenue and hits to all these *retarded* articles. They keep writing them because people keep clicking on them. STOP IT people!
Don't worry, nobody ever reads TFA anyways.
Re: (Score:2)
Apple lovers must be stopped.
Hey, don't blame us. We hate fluff stories too.
Re: (Score:2)
Settle down, NumbNuts. They happened to use an iPad because it contains an ARM chip. It's idiots like you that make Slashdot basically unreadable.
Re: (Score:2)
Settle down, NumbNuts. They happened to use an iPad because it contains an ARM chip. It's idiots like you that make Slashdot basically unreadable.
To be fair, the very mention of Apple products seems to have this effect on all public forums. It's as if there is some kind of Apple field that shuts down higher brain functions and forces everyone to revert to purely emotional reactions.
Re: (Score:2)
The emotional reaction is exactly what Apple advertises to. It's intentional to trigger that particular area of your brain.
Simon Sinek talks about it during this 18 minute talk:
http://www.ted.com/talks/simon_sinek_how_great_leaders_inspire_action.html [ted.com]
Re: (Score:2)
The Greater Internet Fuckwad Theory meets the Reality Distortion Field.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Oh my god. If I have to read one more BS Apple story like this on the internet, I'm going to go nuts
Oh my god. If I have to read one more utterly ignorant post that completely misses the point of the article, I'm ... well, sadly, it's going to happen because twits like you are everywhere of late...
Others have already pointed out - the article is about ARM. It just happened to be an iPad 2 that was used in the testing.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
"Apple's iOS more complicated than Multics! Story at 11!"
incomplete (Score:2)
how many furlongs per fortnight did each perform?
New from InGen, Inc. (Score:2)
This just In! (Score:5, Funny)
But... (Score:2)
Does it run Linux?
Re: (Score:2)
Linux should be portable to the Cray platform. Sounds like a fun project, has anyone access to a Cray 2 for testing and debugging?
Re: (Score:2)
On a more serious note, the interest in this in terms of miniaturization and power optimization. The Cray was built for nuclear weapons testing. It was beyond the state of the art for the time. We are now seeing the state of the art in consumer toys, efficient use of electricity, materials, space.
You lost me at Python (Score:2)
> Performance improvements were made to the iPad 2 LINPACK software by writing Python
You lost me there.
> ...for generating and testing various Assembly routines.
That makes more sense.
Re: (Score:3)
It was obvious by the Cray 2 / iPad 2 comparison that this is BS.
I knew the Cray-2 (Score:5, Interesting)
I was privileged to program on the Cray-2 back in the day. It was an awesome machine if you had the right kinds of problems for it to solve. My hat is off to the company who let me use the fastest computer in the world for my vi sessions :). That said it;s hardly surprising that the march of Moore's law has resulted in an iPad today beating a computer 13 or so years its senior.
Re:I knew the Cray-2 (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Oops, yes I seem to have lost a decade somewhere, guess my slow clock speed is showing.
Re:I knew the Cray-2 (Score:4, Informative)
When I started my Master's thesis, I began learning to program the Cray-XMP. In Fortran still, with some C (pre-ANSI C for you whippersnappers). Then I got a job, and that opportunity fell by the wayside. I still am in awe with how those machines were optimized.
Of course today, I would just use Matlab, and if I needed more speed, I would compile it to C++ and run natively. But it has been a long time since I have done any serious number crunching.
For a good read, pick up "Turing's Cathedral", it is a good story of the birth of electronic digital computers, and an eye-opener.
Re: (Score:2)
... it was an awesome machine if you had the right kinds of problems for it to solve...
Indeed it was, I got to use one briefly in the 90's that ran Unicos and it took my breath away. (When I typed "emacs" it started immediately!!)
Re: (Score:2)
I did Hello World on a Cray XMP. But I had to walk half way across campus to pick up the printout of the results.
Cray Superior (Score:2)
What the headline giveth . . . (Score:4, Interesting)
. . . the article taketh away.
From the Phoronix article: "When benchmarking the Apple iPad 2, the University of Tennessee employee achieved 4 GFLOPS per Watt on the ARM SoC (measured at the chip level)."
The linked graphs don't have units on them, so I have to assume until proven otherwise that the article is correct. But performance per watt, while a valid comparison, doesn't equate to "faster than a Cray-2" in the sense I read the headline, since I assume the Cray-2 pulled quite a bit more power than the iPad. To be "faster than a Cray-2", you really would need a Beowulf cluster of iPad processors.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
...To be "faster than a Cray-2", you really would need a Beowulf cluster of iPad processors.
Cray2 -> 2GFLOPS total
iPad2 -> dual-core 1GHz A9+ GPU...
The Neon coprocessor on each ARM A9 is SIMD 2x32-bit Flops/clock. On this basis, it's not to hard to believe a single iPad2 has more raw Gflops than a Cray2 (w/o needing a beowulf cluster).
On the other hand, the Cray2 was available way back in 1985, (the year that Steve Jobs got kicked out of Apple)...
Researcher = Jack Dongarra (Score:5, Informative)
Evolution (Score:2, Funny)
Decades of Moore's law and clever mniaturization lead us to freaking hipster filtering JPEG crap on Instagram, faster. Slow clap.
But... will it blend? (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:3)
Depends on how big a blender you have. The brochure [craysupercomputers.com] says the Cray 2 was 45 inches tall, 53 inches in diameter, and weighed 5500 pounds. [Aaaaaaand ... cue the "Yo Momma" jokes.] According to Guinness, the world's largest blender [guinnessworldrecords.com] was "4.79 m (16 ft 4 in) tall, 2.43 (8 ft) wide, 3.04 m (10 ft) deep and ... [was used] to make a 1, 324 litre (291 gal / 350 US gal) smoothie." Assuming the smoothie ingredients weighed the same as water, the blender was able to handle just shy of 3000 pounds. That's well shy of th
Re: (Score:2)
pfffffft (Score:2)
So, it is saying that a car with an engine that can get 400mpg is more economical than one with 30mpg, but they leave out the important part that it will take you 10x longer to get to your destination. I hate the trite "typical marketing", but that is what this is
Re: (Score:2)
So, it is saying that a car with an engine that can get 400mpg is more economical than one with 30mpg, but they leave out the important part that it will take you 10x longer to get to your destination. I hate the trite "typical marketing", but that is what this is
Unlike with engines if it's truly better on the "performance per watt" scale you can build super computers with 10x, 100x, whatever it takes of extra chips, to get there faster on the same power budget; Which would make Arm A9 viable for people with LINPACK like workloads, unless the cost of extra networking gear (and other support hardware), kills them.
Wasn't some company working on an Arm based super computer? They must be thrilled.
Re: (Score:2)
So, it is saying that a car with an engine that can get 400mpg is more economical than one with 30mpg, but they leave out the important part that it will take you 10x longer to get to your destination. I hate the trite "typical marketing", but that is what this is
Unlike with engines if it's truly better on the "performance per watt" scale you can build super computers with 10x, 100x, whatever it takes of extra chips, to get there faster on the same power budget; Which would make Arm A9 viable for people with LINPACK like workloads, unless the cost of extra networking gear (and other support hardware), kills them. Wasn't some company working on an Arm based super computer? They must be thrilled.
Wrong. There's always going to be steps where only a single thread of execution can run. Those steps will determine how much of a speed up parallelization will get you. Adding more processors will just result in more processors idling when those bottlenecks occur and if your processors are not fast enough at those bottlenecks, then it could be much better to get fewer more powerful processors so that bottlenecks are finished more quickly.
Re: (Score:2)
How useful LINPACK is to super computers isn't within my field of expertise, but if Arm is truly better on a performance per watt scale and some other constraint don't step in, then it does not matter how much faster a single chip is than the arm solution, as one can just add more arms (for LINPACK like workloads).
I'm somewhat skeptical to that article, reads too much like an advertisement, but the results may still be significant
Re: (Score:3)
That's true for desktops maybe.
For servers performance per watt is probably much more important. 1000 xeons, 10,000 a9s - what difference does it make? Once my stuff is parallelized, it doesn't really matter if it executes on 1000 cores or 10k cores. I don't know how all the expenses break down - power usage is one component, but so is the number of physical components, space taken up, etc.
It comes down to what's cheaper, and the type of application. But I think it's wrong to dismiss ARM as slow. It doesn't make sense to compare one ARM processor to one Intel/AMD processor.
That's not truly. Applying Amdahl's law, there's a lower limit in regards to the speedups you can achieve. To use an analogy, regardless of how many women are available, you're not really going to a new baby in less than 9 months. Even if your web server can handle 1 million requests in parallel, if each request will take a second to complete, that may be unacceptable. So if you have to hit certain latency requirements, then complaining about the ARM processors as being slow is perfectly valid.
Whop de do.. (Score:3)
I would hope we had advanced since then. The point of this 'revelation' was what? Click ad revenue generation?
it is so much more than that!! (Score:5, Funny)
It has been demonstrated that the ipad 2 is lighter than an Apple II.
The ipad 2 user interface has been tested and proven much better than the Zilog Z80's.
On a blind test, the ipad's screen resolution has been voted subjectively better than the MSX's!
And an independent research confirmed that it has more available apps than the HP41C!
In a random test with a control group, 3 out of 5 teenagers prefer the ipad when offered the option of an ipad or a Newton, and 2 out of 4 girls prefer the ipad over Justin "Beaver".
Oh my God, the ipad is really the best thing in the whole universe! No, it has been demonstrated that it is better than 5 universes put together with whipped cream and strawberries on top!!
I'm disappointed (Score:3)
This far in, and still no comments about a Beowulf Cluster of iPads.
What has Slashdot become?
Re: (Score:2)
There was one up there - see 'Faster than a Cray Super computer?!'
Re: (Score:2)
What has Slashdot become?
Slashdot has finally become sentient and decided to automatically remove all Beowulf Cluster comments.
/Still no unicode support
Cycles != results (Score:3)
All these great things that have been done on a Cray now equal the numbing stupidity of things like Facebook on an iPad?
The Cray would hurt more ... (Score:3)
... if dropped on your foot.
Congratulations to Cray (Score:2)
I find that to be simply amazing that hand-held consumer devices are only now matching and exceeding computing hardware that was invented over 27 years ago.
Is this an elaborate joke? (Score:2)
One of the slides is titled "Let's Do Assembly ... in Python"
For Science! (Score:2)
Decades later, technological advancements have been made! Everyone (especially those brainwashed Apple cultists) was astounded when science decided it wasn't going to sit there and do nothing!
Christ (Score:3)
Guess what? Computing power has increased exponentially in the last three decades. If this surprises you you're an idiot. I mean, ten years ago I paid $2,000 for a Toshiba laptop with a whopping 1 GB of RAM and a 20G hard disk; now I can get a Tracfone with better specs than that.
Slashdot sure seems to have its collective mouth wrapped tightly around the iSchlong lately.
Is this a thing again? (Score:2)
Not a fair comparison (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The Cray 2 was a child's toy?
I guess that kid grew up to be a programmer or something.
Re: (Score:3)
s this LINPACK metric something that exercises the Crey's massive pipeline architecture, where huge arrays of numbers (the vectors) were operated on at lightning speed through pipeline (assembly line-style) chip design? Or is it just a looping test?
Now that's a stupid question [netlib.org]
Re: (Score:2)
The Cray connection made me thing of The Last Starfighter.
With all of the artist wannabe advertising approaches, you would think that Apple would be all over the idea of creating 3D models and rendering them on your portable touch screen Cray.
Re: (Score:2)
Apparently, Jack Dongara is smarter than you.
Re: (Score:2)
GP said: "A Cray 2 can pump out 1.9GFLOPS, an ipad2 can put out about 300-400Mflops. About as much as a early PentiumPro"
I am not sure a cray 2 can pump 1.9GFlop/s but an ipad 2 can do more than 300MFlop/s. The processor is clocked a 1 Ghz. It is dual core and it supports NEON vectorial instruction that can do multiple single floating point instruction at a time. (I am not sure exactly how many, I'd need to go to the actual spec, there might be fused multipy-add.) So I am pretty sure the theoretical peak pe
Re: (Score:2)