AMD demanda a Intel

[Enrique33]

Hola.
De nuevo por aqui.
El segundo link me pareció mas explicativo que el primero.

Parece que Intel está en la misma raya de lo legal y lo ilegal.

Copy y paste:

The bad news is that the -axN/-QaxN and axP/-QaxP tell the compiler to generate multiple code paths. The optimized SSE2 or SSE3 code paths are still vendor-checked; the difference is that there will be a generic (less optimized) fallback. The application will run—you won't get the dreaded "Fatal Error." But the best possible code path won't run on a non-Intel processor. Your app runs... but it's not fully optimized. Still, it's better than not running at all.

What Can You Do?
Currently, developers cannot create optimized applications using the Intel compilers that will run on non-Intel processors. The only way to achieve runtime portability is to disable optimizations that might cause the binaries to fail on non-Intel processors. This reduces the value of an expensive optimizing compiler.

How can this be addressed? Developers could request that Intel change the behavior of its compilers, and use the industry-standard feature flags, not the proprietary processor vendor string, to determine when a processor is compatible with specific compiler optimizations and instruction set instructions.

In the meantime, the best bet is to switch to a different family of compilers. As mentioned above, there are plenty of options available, from PathScale to Portland Group, from Microsoft to Sun, as well as open-source compilers from GNU. If you're trying to develop for an industry-standard architecture, you can't use tools that won't respect those standards.
(Fuente: Steve Westfield is a C/C++ programmer, consultant and video game addict who lives outside of Chicago).

Creo que la ùltima frase es clara.

Me parece que un juez que conozca de estos temas, o que esté asesorado por buenos técnicos, le dará la razón a AMD.

Seguimos conversando