On Tue, Feb 2, 2016 at 7:04 AM, Benjamin Smedberg <benja...@smedbergs.us> wrote: > > > On 1/29/2016 2:05 PM, Cameron Kaiser wrote: >> >> On 1/29/16 9:43 AM, Ashley Gullen wrote: >>> >>> FWIW, the Steam Hardware Survey says 99.99% of users have SSE2 (under >>> "other settings"): http://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey >> >> >> For that to be valid, one must assume that the population of Firefox users >> and Steam users are sufficiently similar. I don't think that's necessarily >> true since most Steam titles have substantially higher system requirements. > > The last time we broke this (by accident) was several years ago. At the > time, we got vigorous complaining from various people who had relatively > recent bare-bones machines without SSE2. > > It might be worth reconsidering now: I'm not willing to throw away 0.5% of > our users without good cause, but perhaps there is a good cause to be made > here? What would the performance gain be for the remaining 99.5% of users, > realizing that we already have dynamic SSE2/non-SSE switching in place for > some of our hottest paths.
The main question here I think is, whether we've enabled SSE2 for 64bit build It seems to me if we do, whether enabling SSE2 on x86 doesn't really matter unless we have a good reason. Fewer and fewer people would stick on x86, especially who cares about performance. If we haven't yet done that, we should. It seems to me the majority processors which supports x64 also supports SSE2. If there are really some people who use a processor doesn't support SSE2 but are using 64bit Firefox, they could simply back to use the 32bit version. - Xidorn _______________________________________________ dev-platform mailing list dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform
