![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Is it just me, or has Intel removed fp64 FPUs entirely from their Gen 11+ graphics solutions (including for their ARC GPUs, as confirmed here, their integrated Gen 12 graphics solutions such as Intel UHD 770, as demonstrated by a lack of the cl_khr_fp64 extension here, AND Intel UHD Graphics for 11th Gen Intel Processors, which also includes the integrated graphics for the 11400H in the laptop which I own, as shown by lack of OpenCL "Double-precision Floating-point support" shown in attached terminal output image for the integrated graphics on my 11400H)? If FP64 FPU units simply aren't present on these graphics solutions and support for fp64 has to be software-emulated via these instructions, then via my testing I've done using mixbench and CLBlast the FP64 compute capability in FLOPS is only ~1/160th - ~1/128th of the FP32 compute capability (please see other two attached images for proof), which completely contradicts the 1 to 4 ratio of FP32 to FP64 compute GFLOPS as claimed by sites like cpu-monkey and techpowerup (EDIT: techpowerup JUST updated their compute capability stats for their Intel Gen 11+ graphics solutions to more accurate numbers).Īnd while I completely understand that FP64 use cases amongst average consumers are pretty niche as compared to the vast majority of people who shop graphics cards, given how there's readily available free software out there such as PyTorch that takes advantage of FP64 compute capabilities on various processors (take Double Tensors in PyTorch for example), I believe that sites like cpu-monkey and techpowerup should provide the average consumer (esp. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |