63 pointsby pella3 hours ago4 comments
  • twoodfin2 hours ago
    I don’t think picking a handful of SPEC benchmarks that approximate today’s most common agentic workloads (compiling code, interpreting Python) and then calling them “agentic benchmarks” is misleading at all.

    That you need a whole lot of “ordinary” compute to benefit from the scaling properties of agents is the reason Nvidia is making this chip in the first place.

    • jcranmer22 minutes ago
      The four benchmarks selected are cppcheck, llvm, cpython, and gcc [1]. These are all essentially compiler benchmarks... and all of the compiler benchmarks in SPEC cpu2026! This makes the benchmark selection somewhat suspicious to me, since it's not particularly representative of a diverse set of workloads.

      I also don't buy that it's a particularly representative set of tasks you might do with agents. Also included in the SPEC benchmarks are multimedia codecs, lossless data compression codecs, sqlite (i.e., database), all of which are going to be things you should easily throw into the sets of tasks an agentic workload might do. Cherry-picking just the compiler benchmarks instead of all of SPECint... again, it just raises a couple of eyebrows.

      [1] To be honest, I'm kinda surprised that both gcc and llvm are in SPEC cpu2026.

  • davoneus2 hours ago
    I'm glad to see the competition; nothing provokes meaningful change without it. Not surprised at Nvidia's blatant fabrications though; more of the same we've seen time and again (Superchip anyone, with 2+ year old designs).
  • foota2 hours ago
    This is neat. I'm only halfway through but some really cool discussion about the internals of the chips and what they offer.
  • brcmthrowawayan hour ago
    So, is this rip AMD
    • wmf42 minutes ago
      AMD announced a faster CPU two days later.