Agner Fog, a Danish expert in software optimization is making a plea for an open and standarized procedure for x86 instruction set extensions. Af first sight, this may seem a discussion that does not concern most of us. After all, the poor souls that have to program the insanely complex x86 compilers will take care of the complete chaos called “the x86 ISA”, right? Why should the average the developer, system administrator or hardware enthusiast care?

Agner goes in great detail why the incompatible SSE-x.x additions and other ISA extensions were and are a pretty bad idea, but let me summarize it in a few quotes:

* “The total number of x86 instructions is well above one thousand” (!!)

* “CPU dispatching … makes the code bigger, and it is so costly in terms of development time and maintenance costs that it is almost never done in a way that adequately optimizes for all brands of CPUs.”

* “the decoding of instructions can be a serious bottleneck, and it becomes worse the more complicated the instruction codes are”

* The costs of supporting obsolete instructions is not negligible. You need large execution units to support a large number of instructions. This means more silicon space, longer data paths, more power consumption, and slower execution.

Summarized: Intel and AMD's proprietary x86 additions cost us all money. How much is hard to calculate, but our CPUs are consuming extra energy and underperform as decoders and execution units are unnecessary complicated. The software industry is wasting quite a bit of time and effort supporting different extensions.

via AnandTech.