October 15th, 2024

Intel and AMD form advisory group to reshape x86 ISA

Intel and AMD are forming an advisory group with major tech companies to improve x86 instruction set architecture consistency, addressing historical AVX compatibility issues and countering Arm-compatible CPUs in the market.

Read original articleLink Icon
HopeSkepticismFrustration
Intel and AMD form advisory group to reshape x86 ISA

Intel and AMD have announced the formation of an advisory group aimed at reshaping the x86 instruction set architecture (ISA) to enhance compatibility and streamline software development. This initiative comes as both companies have historically co-developed the x86-64 instruction set, but inconsistencies have arisen, particularly with advanced vector extensions (AVX). The new group includes major industry players such as Broadcom, Dell, Google, HPE, and Microsoft, as well as notable individuals like Linus Torvalds. The goal is to create a more uniform implementation of the x86 ISA, which would benefit end users by reducing the need for specialized knowledge when choosing between Intel and AMD products. However, the impact of this collaboration may take time to materialize in actual products, as silicon development is a lengthy process. The advisory group aims to address the evolving demands of emerging technologies while potentially phasing out certain extensions like Intel's advanced matrix extensions (AMX). A more consistent ISA could also help counter the increasing presence of Arm-compatible CPUs in cloud data centers, which currently offer better cross-compatibility.

- Intel and AMD are forming an advisory group to improve x86 ISA consistency.

- The group includes major tech companies and aims to enhance software development.

- Historical inconsistencies in AVX compatibility have prompted this collaboration.

- The impact of the group's work may take years to reflect in products.

- A unified ISA could help combat the rise of Arm-compatible CPUs in the market.

AI: What people are saying
The comments reflect a mix of opinions on the future of x86 architecture and its competition with ARM and RISC-V.
  • Many commenters believe x86 will remain relevant due to its established ecosystem and compatibility with peripherals.
  • There is a desire for Intel and AMD to collaborate on improving ISA consistency, particularly regarding AVX support.
  • Some users express frustration with the complexity and legacy issues of x86, advocating for a shift towards RISC-V.
  • Concerns are raised about the potential dominance of ARM and RISC-V architectures, which could threaten x86's market position.
  • Several commenters highlight the efficiency of ARM processors, especially in terms of power consumption and performance.
Link Icon 16 comments
By @tliltocatl - 4 months
Everyone is commenting on "let x86 die" and I would agree if it was just about ISA. But the problem is that x86 has some-sorta-total-disaster-of-a-standard for peripherals and configuration (ACPI, UEFI and so on) and you can actually buy a computer that is compliant and will run Linux out of the box, even if with some glitches.

ARM is a handful of totally incompatible SoCs and you are totally dependent on SoC integrator providing support (hopefully in the form of throw-over-the-fence-and-forget Linux kernel headers, but more common are just kernel binaries) to run it at all. In theory UEFI supports ARM, but can I buy a desktop ARM processor that does? And this is going to be worse with RISC-V because hardware vendor are not interested in providing platform compatibility. So we would be back in pre-PC era platform-wise.

There is no replacement for x86, not because it is impossible to replace, but because no vendor is interested in making one.

By @Remnant44 - 4 months
This is hopeful. Whatever the ARM enthusiasts would like, x86 is going to stick around for a long time, and working together to evolve the ISA extensions in a more cohesive manner would go a long way.

In particular, I'd really like AMD and Intel to get on the same page in terms of avx10 / avx512 support.

Many people correctly note that avx512 support is not super relevant today, but this can be laid heavily at the feet of Intel's process troubles and a terrible decision to use ISA for market segmentation purposes.

Zen4/zen5 show that it is possible to implement wide vector units on a cpu in an extremely beneficial way - even if you're running reduced width execution units under the hood, the improved frontend performance is really useful - and also actually saves power, as the decoders and schedulers account for a fair chunk of power consumption these days.

By @sedatk - 4 months
After 40+ years, finally :) I really want x86 and ARM to push each other for better power efficiency and performance instead of one side winning out. I’m using an ARM laptop nowadays and the battery life is so impressive.
By @ChuckMcM - 4 months
Feels like one of the signs of the apocalypse :-) And it is a pretty stunning "conclusion" to a war that started 20 years ago with the introduction of Sledgehammer and the AMD64 instruction set.

For me though it really emphasizes how much of a threat ARM (and presumably RISCV) architectures are to these two companies.

By @bewaretheirs - 4 months
Odd that the article makes no mention of intel's APX extensions (which add more integer registers, 3-operand variants of most 2-operand instructions, and assorted other tweaks).
By @bcrl - 4 months
The prior rumours that Jim Keller had AMD develop the K10 core with the option of using an ARM front end would have created an extremely interesting way to compare the merits of the 2 instruction sets. x86 has constraints that make it far more programmer friendly than ARM (weak memory ordering models make my brain hurt!), yet performance has been pushed ahead through techniques that were only dreamed of decades ago. I really wonder what Intel and AMD could come up with using the ARM64 instruction set combined with the knowledge gained from decades of pushing x86 and x86-64 to the limit.
By @ytch - 4 months
As the news mentions, I hope it is the time pushing x86s Architecture[1] to real world.

[1] https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/developer/articles/t...

By @ksec - 4 months
Finally. I hope Intel and AMD allows a clean, may be slightly backward incompatible subset of x86-64 that is open for all to implement.

Lets call the new institutions set AE86. It is old, but fast around corners.

By @bloated5048 - 4 months
RISC is the future
By @rwaksmunski - 4 months
Just let it fade away with dignity.
By @autoexecbat - 4 months
Give us some riscv instruction decoders on the x86 cpus, let us pick per-process what ISA we use
By @rasz - 4 months
Start with optional fixed instruction size mode.
By @anthk - 4 months
Let it die, adopt RISC-V. X86 is built on cruft over cruft.
By @rdudek - 4 months
I wish we could just get away from x86 "standard" and move on. If there is something that still needs it, x86 emulation is very efficient nowadays. Just look what Apple has done with this ARM architecture. Even now, Qualcom's ARM processors running Windows are doing a fantastic job emulating x86 as needed.