Lines Matching full:itanium
17 // different from Itanium to this module viewpoint. Most notably, is it
18 // "wider" than Itanium? Can you experience loop scalability as
23 // module Itanium2 remains effectively as "wide" as Itanium. Yet it's
28 // Itanium Itanium2
42 // Itanium would exhibit anti-scalability. So I've chosen to reschedule
128 // Oh! Benchmarks were performed on 733MHz Lion-class Itanium
164 // performance loss on Itanium for scalability.
317 // This loop spins in 2*(n+12) ticks. It's scheduled for data in Itanium
323 // IA-64, but would hurt Itanium for about same because of longer
423 // This loop spins in 3*(n+10) ticks on Itanium and in 2*(n+10) on
424 // Itanium 2. Yes, unlike previous versions it scales:-) Previous
426 // for those even on Itanium 2. In this version one addition is
492 // 2*(n+17) on Itanium, (n+17) on "wider" IA-64 implementations. It's
496 // benchmark program is profiled. I.e. if perfomance gain on Itanium
537 // Itanium days it's simply too hard to justify the effort so I just
571 // clause in Itanium µ-architecture manual? Comments are welcomed and
574 // On Itanium 2 it takes ~190 ticks. This is because of stalls on
