> The design of the CPU matters for this quality criterion only in the unlikely scenario when the design team was not competent and they have made a far from optimal design.
I think this is an overstatement in a couple of ways:
> unlikely scenario
We're still less than a decade removed from the final descendants of Bulldozer. We can't directly compare it to Zen because of the process differences, but Bulldozer sucked in several ways that weren't related to its 28nm process.
> made a far from optimal design
AMD and Intel continue to release improved x86 architectures. Alder Lake introduced heterogeneous cores to x86. Zen 5's dual decode path is less visible, but an innovation in its own right. If there is a long-term local max in x86 design, we haven't found it yet.
That's not to say flagrantly bad design is impossible (again, Bulldozer) - it's only to say that there are indeed two avenues to making a CPU better. Even if one avenue (process) sets the hypothetical ceiling for the other (architecture), we haven't found that ceiling very often for any particular process node. Incremental improvements are a routine part of any uarch, even when the process remains the same.
I think this is an overstatement in a couple of ways:
> unlikely scenario
We're still less than a decade removed from the final descendants of Bulldozer. We can't directly compare it to Zen because of the process differences, but Bulldozer sucked in several ways that weren't related to its 28nm process.
> made a far from optimal design
AMD and Intel continue to release improved x86 architectures. Alder Lake introduced heterogeneous cores to x86. Zen 5's dual decode path is less visible, but an innovation in its own right. If there is a long-term local max in x86 design, we haven't found it yet.
That's not to say flagrantly bad design is impossible (again, Bulldozer) - it's only to say that there are indeed two avenues to making a CPU better. Even if one avenue (process) sets the hypothetical ceiling for the other (architecture), we haven't found that ceiling very often for any particular process node. Incremental improvements are a routine part of any uarch, even when the process remains the same.