Why is it written like that lmao

Wikipedia is written by various people, but likely someone with interest in a given topic. One or more realtors probably wrote or edited this post.

Actually, the history of edits shows that this is contested territory where people regularly remove what they term as spam links. So, while a disinterested editor might remove a link to a listicle about how to stage your home, they might leave in the breathless tone as harmless. The drive by editors probably feel that they have no more time to rewrite it than we do, given that they watch over many articles, not just this one.

Its been "staged"

You can just check you don’t have to imagine anything

> the 2017 Intel Xeon gets more points than an Apple M1 on multicore but everyone knows that they are incomparable

Why are they incomparable? If I want to run a highly parallel task surely this tells me which one to use?

> Benchmarks like 7Zip compression/decompression, LAME encoding, Blackmagic RAW video encoding, Cinebench, x265 encoding, Blender encoding, Y Cruncher, and any of the built-in video game benchmarks make much more sense than Geekbench.

Pretty sure the internal tests it uses are similar to these

In the past, they have provided information on which workloads they use.

For instance, the file compression workload on version 6:

This workload compresses and decompresses the Ruby 3.1.2 source archive (a 75 MB archive with 9,841 files) using different compression codecs (such as LZ4 and ZSTD). It also verifies the files using the SHA1 (Secure Hash Algorithm 1) function.

https://www.geekbench.com/doc/geekbench6-cpu-workloads.pdf

It looks like they have the workloads for version 7 as well:

CPU: https://www.geekbench.com/doc/geekbench7-cpu-workloads.pdf

GPU: https://www.geekbench.com/doc/geekbench7-gpu-workloads.pdf

Thanks for finding that.

> The Clang workload uses the Clang compiler to compile the Lua interpreter, a popular open-source language interpreter.

People really shouldn't call Geekbench a synthetic benchmark anymore, since it has been using real world workloads for years now.

If memory serves, it has been since version 4 or 5 that they started including real workloads. I agree that it shouldn’t be considered synthetic any more.

I wonder if this incentivizes people to form groups that self-vet for quality submissions to enhance their reputation.

i mean; that sounds like a win for GH right?

Compilers are really good but really good is not actually that useful in cases where you need SIMD

I mean, utter bullshit. If you "need SIMD" you know exactly the programming pattern to guarantee SIMD from the compiler. And the single and only people who "need SIMD" know these rules. It is only the hobbyist "SIMD is neat" community that upvotes these ridiculous articles.

When I need SIMD I rarely use the compiler to help

It pays quite well if you know who to work for

I think what the parent comment sentiment was that having this knowledge generally does not pay off but there are certainly positions which do ask for it specifically. And they are very few IME.

I don’t think any of this really reaches to the level of individual SIMD implementations in hardware

It’s worth knowing SIMD for the purpose of knowing when it’s not worth using

It’s really hard to make this work in general

It can show up in JavaScript if you write your code in a way that lets the browser engine lower it to SIMD under the hood

how do I do that? :-)

It depends on what you're doing and which browser engine you're using, unfortunately.