Slashdot Mirror


It's (Almost) Hammer Time

thelizman writes "C|Net is catching up on the buzz with AMD's Hammer line of processors. Of note in the article is how AMD demonstrated their 64-bit contender using Linux and Windows, instead of just Windows. In reality, Linux will likely have 64 bit applications more quickly than Microsoft, and will see use on this processor more readily than your average WinTel machine, so you know...like...it only makes sense."

344 comments

  1. Sweet by AllMightyPaul · · Score: 0, Troll

    So AMD has caught up in the race for 64-bit computing. Perhaps SMP will be viable soon, too.

    1. Re:Sweet by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you read the article is said 2003 for SMP.

  2. Stop! Hammer time. by jonestor · · Score: 0, Redundant

    Intel knows it can't touch this. :)

  3. Showcasing Linux shows... by Archie+Steel · · Score: 2, Funny

    ...that AMD knows which way the Winblows...er, I mean...which way the wind blows.

    --

    Reminder: find a new sig
    1. Re:Showcasing Linux shows... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not really... It shows they know their markets and ignoring one is a bad PR move

    2. Re:Showcasing Linux shows... by jo42 · · Score: 1

      Oh! Ah! The Slashdot Linux dweeb crowd discovers 64-bit processors. Alpha, MIPS and SPARC users wonder what rock the slashdot gaggle of gits has been living under.

  4. news for nerds... by edrugtrader · · Score: 1, Funny

    not comedians, taco...

    --
    MARIJUANA, SHROOMS, X: ONLINE?! - E
    1. Re:news for nerds... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes I expect all serious news to come from a source named Cmdr. Taco. Its such a serious journalistic identity to go by, how could I not take everything he writes seriously?

    2. Re:news for nerds... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And critique from one named "Anonymous Coward"... This site is rife with integrity.

  5. Will this hammer... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    come with an ice pick? Cuz you're gonna need a solid block of ice to cool the damn thing. It IS an AMD, afterall.

    1. Re:Will this hammer... by Mr+Z · · Score: 1

      Not like Intel is that much better. Heck, according to the designers here, Itanium apparently burns 35 Watts in its clock tree alone!

      --Joe
    2. Re:Will this hammer... by phagstrom · · Score: 5, Funny
      Cuz you're gonna need a solid block of ice to cool the damn thing. It IS an AMD, afterall


      With no cooler:

      Can't thouch this!! :-)
    3. Re:Will this hammer... by RainbowSix · · Score: 5, Informative

      How did this get modded up? Check www.sandpile.org. The P4 maxed out at 99 watts and the Athlon maxed out at 75 watts. Maybe AMD should add huge plastic brackets to their spec so people can use freakin huge heat sinks and then maybe they'll shut up about trying to cool a "megar" T-bird 1.4 gig@75 watts.

      --
      --------
      It's OK to be social, just don't tell anyone about it.
    4. Re:Will this hammer... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      0.13u SOI, dipshit.

    5. Re:Will this hammer... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      use BTU as a new rating ?

      e.g. Athlon 4000+ BTU ?

      BTU = British Heating Units

    6. Re:Will this hammer... by Sadfsdaf · · Score: 1

      They do. Check out the Alpha PAL 80345. It can't fit on half the motherboards w/o modifications. It uses the 4 open holes in new AMD motherboards. Mine is coming tomorrow =]. It's an incredibe heatsink, but rather expensive, 40 bucks without a fan. But it cools nicely and there's no chance that it'll pop off since it's screwed into the motherboard

  6. cf: IA64 by bugnuts · · Score: 5, Interesting

    The 64-bit x-86 hasn't been welcomed as warmly, primarily due to backward compatibility issues. Definitely having the source and being able to recompile Linux apps will give the Linux folks a jump out the gate for 64-bit apps.

    In general, I doubt strongly this is a AMD vs Intel issue, either. This is a Windows (and their legacy users) vs Linux (and their overly prideful users that must find every method to berate windows). :)

    1. Re:cf: IA64 by morbid · · Score: 0

      What are you on? The 64-bit x86 is 100% backwards compatible (even at the OS level) with the 32-bit x86 and it runs the code at full speed.

      --
      I'm out of my tree just now but please feel free to leave a banana.
    2. Re:cf: IA64 by Ent · · Score: 0

      What backwards compat issue would you be talking about? When is the last time you tried to use a IA64 machine with a "built for 32bit" application and had problems?

      As you said this isnt a AMD vs Intel issue however it is also not a Linux vs Windows issue (although I am sure most will try and turn it into that). This is a "Who is going to make 64bit specific apps that their customers are *cough* demanding" issue.

    3. Re:cf: IA64 by storem · · Score: 5, Informative
      It seems AMD is aware of this. They even sponsor a website dedicated to 64-bit porting open source software. (Including GNU/Linux offcourse).

      The site also has a 64-bit simulator for you favorite 32-bit processor based Linux system.

    4. Re:cf: IA64 by maxpublic · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Linux (and their overly prideful users that must find every method to berate windows).

      Don't forget the folks who claim that a particular stereotype perpetrated by a few zealots must obviously apply to an entire class of people....

      Max

      --
      My god carries a hammer. Your god died nailed to a tree. Any questions?
    5. Re:cf: IA64 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ummm - it _is_ a Linux versus Windows issue. Because Windows will not run in 64-bit mode on AMD64 and Linux will. That makes the chip significantly more useful to Linux users, and also substantially limits the market for this thing.

      The apps issue is of course a seperate question, but Oracle on Linux on AMD64 isn't that hard to imagine, esp because Oracle's buddy SuSE is doing the AMD support.

    6. Re:cf: IA64 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Umm.. Hammer is capable of running 32bit apps at full speed (no emulation) under a 64bit OS. Compatibility should be compeletely acheivable.

      In fact its expected that the norm would be 32bit apps running on the Hammer with only a few things initially as 64bit.

      Of course the real benefit in x86-64 mode is the doubling of GPR and SSE2 registers, since that would reduce memory accesses once compilers are written to take advantage of them.

    7. Re:cf: IA64 by rabidcow · · Score: 1

      Porting *ANYTHING* to x86-64 will be much easier than porting to ia64. Whether or not Microsoft has chosen to spend time for this is a matter of choosing their partners.

      Apparently AMD talked with various "OS vendors" during the design of this architecture, so presumably Microsoft has even had some say in what would make it easier for them to use it.

    8. Re:cf: IA64 by kurt555gs · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      I am sorry but ........ my opinion on this is those that have the mental capacity to use Linux , DO , and those that dont , use windows.

      Looking at the percentages of desktop use ... this is a pretty scarry though

      --
      * Carthago Delenda Est *
    9. Re:cf: IA64 by Tim12s · · Score: 1

      Cheap AMD Linux Server Boxen will (speculation) make MS suffer in the server market.

      MS will push for greater use of amd64.

      Intel will do one of two things:

      restrict MS use of amd64, if IA64 turns out good
      implement amd64 in yamhill if AMD starts beating IA64.

      Intel's play in things will depend on who's profit line starts to suffer first.

      MS / Intel.

      One thing is certain: Legacy software is here for a reason. It isnt going to just up and migrate to IA64. AMD will want to run that software as f= a= s= t= as possible running x86-32 asfast as amd64.

      One thing intel might try is embrace and extend (ms style), by outselling the number of CPUs with amd extensions... or have an entirely new 64bit instruction set, and screw amd over the appropriate extensions and binary compatability issues. This alone is a developmental hazard.

    10. Re:cf: IA64 by Bert64 · · Score: 1

      Not to mention the ability to compile apps designed to take advantage of 64bit cpu`s such as alpha/ultrasparc/mips, such as openssl

      --
      http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!
    11. Re:cf: IA64 by cmkrnl · · Score: 1

      Who modded this gobshite as 'interesting' ? Its a fscking lame arse troll.

      Curmudgeon

    12. Re:cf: IA64 by heffrey · · Score: 0

      I've looked up the word 'boxen' in my English dictionary. It's not there. Please could you tell me what it means?

    13. Re:cf: IA64 by Tim12s · · Score: 1

      'boxen', its a play on words.

      there's a word, where, dropping the S adding 'en' meaning 'alot of'. I picked it up from somewhere/something, just an interesting change to english.

      probably slang or a crossover from another language. but, who cares.

      -Tim

    14. Re:cf: IA64 by majestyk2000 · · Score: 1

      I always figured 'boxen' as the plural of 'box' was along the lines of 'oxen' being the plural of 'ox'. Makes sense to me.

    15. Re:cf: IA64 by heffrey · · Score: 0

      It just confuses people in my view and it comes across as trying to be clever. What's wrong with boxes?

      This is the sort of abuse of language that encourages the geek stereotype.

      :-)

  7. AMD's New Slogan by Talisman · · Score: 3, Funny

    You can't touch this!

    Talisman

    --

    "Study your math, kids. Key to the universe." -The Archangel Gabriel
    1. Re:AMD's New Slogan by bugnuts · · Score: 1

      Considering how hot AMDs run, who would want to touch it?!

    2. Re:AMD's New Slogan by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You simply repeated the joke without any of the funny parts...

      Why?

    3. Re:AMD's New Slogan by waspleg · · Score: 1

      what's more annoying then that? he got mod points

      where as i posted the first lame hammer joke and got immediately slammed to -1 and then i posted a reply and got slammed to -1 and theni posted another and got slamemd to -1

      mod points are stupid, i'm starting think slashdot might not need to be my homepage anymore
      this shit is lunacy..

    4. Re:AMD's New Slogan by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      oh! so that was what the title was referring to.

      it's amazing how you made that connection.

    5. Re:AMD's New Slogan by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I gotta admit that I prefer the 'U can't touch this' joke to your '2 legit 2 quit' joke. It makes the connection between M.C. Hammer and AMD, whereas yours simply references M.C. Hammer.

      *shrug*

      You didn't deserve -2 Troll for the joke, though.

    6. Re:AMD's New Slogan by waspleg · · Score: 1

      hell the original post refers to hammer, i figured the connection was already made..

    7. Re:AMD's New Slogan by jazman_777 · · Score: 1
      You can't touch this!


      I heard that song in a restaurant recently. I couldn't really hear it well, and it drove me nuts until I finally figured out what the song name and singer were. I really had to rack the memory banks, and I almost came up dry.

      --
      Slashdot: Failed Car Analogies. Amateur Lawyering. Anecdote Battles.
    8. Re:AMD's New Slogan by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You sure it wasn't Superfreak?

    9. Re:AMD's New Slogan by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They're also obviously "2 Legit 2 Quit".

    10. Re:AMD's New Slogan by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Intel had better Pray that the Hammer Don't Hurt 'Em

    11. Re:AMD's New Slogan by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Now that one was funny, wtf aint that one modded up?

  8. M.C. Hammer TIME! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Informative

    Well, for all you non-Americans who have never heard of MC Hammer:

    U Can't Touch This
    By M.C. Hammer

    It's hammer time (Repeat 5x)

    My, my, my music hits me so hard
    Makes me say "Oh my Lord"
    Thank you for blessing me
    With a mind to rhyme and two hype feet
    It feels good, when you know you're down
    A super dope homeboy from the Oaktown
    And I'm known as such
    And this is a beat, uh, you can't touch

    I told you homeboy (You can't touch this)
    Yeah, that's how we living and you know (You can't touch this)
    Look at my eyes, man (You can't touch this)
    Yo, let me bust the funky lyrics (You can't touch this)

    Fresh new kicks, advance
    You gotta like that, now you know you wanna dance
    So move, outta your seat
    And get a fly girl and catch this beat
    While it's rolling, hold on
    Pump a little bit and let 'em know it's going on
    Like that, like that
    Cold on a mission so fall them back
    Let 'em know, that you're too much
    And this is a beat, uh, you can't touch

    Yo, I told you (You can't touch this)
    Why you standing there, man? (You can't touch this)
    Yo, sound the bell, school is in, sucka (You can't touch this)

    Give me a song, or rhythm
    Make 'em sweat, that's what I'm giving 'em
    Now, they know
    You talking about the Hammer you talking about a show
    That's hype, and tight
    Singers are sweating so pass them a wipe
    Or a tape, to learn

    1. Re:M.C. Hammer TIME! by posmon · · Score: 1

      send in marky mark on your way out.

      --

      update comments set karma=-1, reason='offtopic' where sid=26315

    2. Re:M.C. Hammer TIME! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      can you finish the lyrics? i had this tape when i was 9 years old and had made up my own lyrics, turns out they aren't even close to the real ones. i'm curious as to how it ends: here's what i remember.....

      Or take to learn
      whatcha gonna do when the mike is burned
      the charts, legit
      either work hard or you might as well quit
      thats word and you know.....
      can't touch this....

      go with the flow
      it is said
      if you can't follow hammer you're better off dead
      so wave your hands in the air
      bust a few moves with your fingers in the air
      move slide your rump
      just for a minute let's all do the hump
      hump hump hump hump
      yahhhh........can't touch this.

    3. Re:M.C. Hammer TIME! by red5 · · Score: 1

      I don't know what's more worrying.
      That you actually took the time to learn that song.
      Or that you still remember it.

      --
      I know I'm going to hell, I'm just trying to get good seats.
    4. Re:M.C. Hammer TIME! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you're writing a letter or post, you will frequently want to be able to include material from the original within your response. While this can be done by Forwarding or Attaching the entire original message, by copying text from the original instead you can insert your comments before, between, and after parts of the original text (which can be indented and "smallified," giving the appearance of quoted-text edit-see below).
      There are also many times when you might want to include material from other sources in your messages, and c/c/p allows you to do this easily-you could even include the text of an entire online newspaper article you want someone to see in a letter to them.

      If you make webpages, the ability to copy information from another location into your own page is a real timesaver (it's also possible to outright steal material in this way-but that would of course be wrong).

      If you write long, involved HTML e-mail signatures, c/c/p will allow you to cut the entire code of your sig and send an HTML-free message, then paste it back after the fact (and you can keep the code by pasting it somewhere else in the meantime-you could even have a series of signatures saved within a single webpage of code on a homepage site).

      The Four Cmd's
      There are four basic Cmd key combinations you'll be using when you cut/copy/paste text. Here they are, along with what they do:
      Cmd-A - Highlights the entire page (actually, in certain situations it will highlight somewhat less than all the text on the screen).
      Cmd-C - Copies whatever was highlighted to your terminal's temporary memory, but always leaves the highlighted text right where you found it.
      Cmd-X - Cuts the highlighted text if you're in a typing area, such an e-mail or newsgroup posting screen, or an HTML editor, or a form text box. Cmd-X will not work on a received e-mail, a viewed newsgroup post, or on a webpage you're viewing (you can use Cmd-C to copy the text, though; see above).
      Cmd-V - Pastes the previously copied or cut text, anywhere you would have been able to type (into an e-mail or post writing screen, a webpage editor, or a form text box).
      In addition, when you're writing something yourself, you can highlight from the cursor position "up" or "down" within the material you're typing/editing by holding the Shift key and pressing an Arrow key.
      Copying only a portion of a viewed webpage or post, or received mail, requires the use of the Find key to create a highlight, which you can then extend to cover everything you want to copy.

      Note: If you're using a wired keyboard, you won't find a Cmd key-the equivalent of the Cmd key is the Microsoft/Windows key (looks kind of like a flag with a cross on it). If you have an older keyboard without the Microsoft/Windows key, use Ctrl-Alt together as your Cmd key equivalent.

      Learning to Use Cut, Copy, Paste
      Try it out. Right now, place your cursor in the form below (it's probably already there) and press Cmd-A to highlight all the text within the text window. Then press Cmd-X to cut it; then Cmd-V to paste it back again-then Cmd-V again, to paste a second copy into the same window.

      While you still have the text temporarily stored in the "clipboard" of your terminal's RAM memory, move the cursor down the the box below, and use Cmd-V to paste the text into it.

      If you're typing a document (e-mail, newsgroup post, text in a form, or HTML code in an editor), you can select text for highlighting from the current cursor location, by holding down the Shift key and using the Right, Left, Up, or Down Arrow (to highlight a character at a time right or left, or a line at a time up or down), or the Up or Down Scroll keys (to highlight a screen's worth of text at a time, with each press of the Scroll key). You can highlight all your writing by using Cmd-A.

      Try it out. Put the cursor into the box below, and move the cursor to the beginning of the text. Then, while holding down the Shift key, press the Right Arrow key a few times to extend the highlight a letter at a time rightward. Then, with Shift held down, press the Down Arrow twice to extend the highlight downward. At any point, you would be able to use Cmd-C to copy or Cmd-X to cut whatever you have highlighted.

      Many times, you'll want to copy just part of an e-mail message, newsgroup post, or webpage text, rather than "grabbing" the entire thing. To select only the portion of the text you want to copy, use Find and search for the word or phrase that appears at either the beginning or end of the section you want to copy; that word or phrase will automatically be highlighted. Then, while holding down the Shift key, use the Arrow or Scroll keys to extend the highlight until the entire section of text you want to copy is selected-then press Cmd-C to copy it. Once you've got it copied, go into your e-mail or newsgroup posting screen (or webpage editor), and use Cmd-V to paste it. (You can still highlight the entire page, or an area of the page (if there are frames or a sidebar) for copying by pressing Cmd-A.)

      Why not try it out, with this paragraph? Hit Find (or press Cmd-F) and type in Why not then hit Return. That will highlight the first two words of this paragraph; then while holding down the Shift key, press the down key until you've highlighted the entire paragraph. Now, press Cmd-C to copy the text.

      Move the cursor into the box below, and press Cmd-V to paste the paragraph of text into it.

      Whatever is copied or cut will be stored in RAM memory, until you either copy or cut something else, or power off the terminal or switch users.

      Practice this all over the place until it becomes second nature. Go to a newspaper site online, for instance, and use Find to select a paragraph in an article, highlight the entire paragraph, use Cmd-C to copy it, then go to Mail and paste the paragraph into a Write screen. Use this feature to copy part of a received e-mail for inclusion with your reply-experiment.

      How to "Fake" Quoted-Text Edit with C/C/P
      Note: The following procedure to set text you're quoting indented and smaller can only be done with text you've pasted into an e-mail or newgroup post you're composing; you can't use this method on a webpage, it doesn't work there.

      Cut/copy/paste will let you "lift" text from almost anywhere you find it with WebTV, but when you insert it into an e-mail or newsgroup post, it'll look just like you typed it yourself.

      Quoted-text edit is a way of making the quote indent and "smallify," and it's done by breaking a paragraph into single lines of text with a hard Return at the end (making them non-wrapping), and a > character before the beginning of the text of each line. Many e-mail and newsreader programs do this reformatting automatically, WebTV doesn't have this feature at this point.

      So you fake it, by inserting hard Returns after each line of text, and placing a > before each.

      First, you would copy a piece of text from a received mail, a newsgroup post, or a webpage, as described above, using Find. Then you would paste it into a Write screen (for either e-mail or newsgroup posting). Here's a sample paragraph of text:

      Welcome to GeoCities Advanced HTML Editor. You can use this form to design your own customized HTML Page. We have developed a preview capability so you can look at your page as it will actually appear on the Web. Take a look at what other people have done to give you some idea of the flexibility and power of our Home Page Editor.

      In your mail Write or newsgroup Post screen, get your cursor in front of the second line of text (the cursor location is indicated by the yellow vertical bar in this example).

      Welcome to GeoCities Advanced HTML Editor. You can use this |form to design your own customized HTML Page. We have developed a preview capability so you can look at your page as it will actually appear on the Web. Take a look at what other people have done to give you some idea of the flexibility and power of our Home Page Editor.

      Then press Delete, then Return-this inserts a hard Return at the end of the first line.

      Move down the left side of the paragraph, doing the same thing to place a hard Return at the end of each line.

      Now, go to the left end of the last line and type in a > character; do this for each line, working to the top, until it looks like this:

      >Welcome to GeoCities Advanced HTML Editor. You can use this
      >form to design your own customized HTML Page. We have
      >developed a preview capability so you can look at your page as it
      >will actually appear on the Web. Take a look at what other people
      >have done to give you some idea of the flexibility and power of our
      >Home Page Editor.

      Don't worry if putting in the > character makes the line you're adding it to break to another line; when the message is sent or posted, the breaks all go away automatically.

      Make sure you hit Return twice any time you want to separate paragraphs of indented text, or before and after the indented material (to keep unindented material from getting "sucked in" to the quote).

      The result with this particular quote would look something like this using this method:

      Welcome to GeoCities Advanced HTML Editor. You can use this form to design your own customized HTML Page. We have developed a preview capability so you can look at your page as it will actually appear on the Web. Take a look at what other people have done to give you some idea of the flexibility and power of our Home Page Editor.
      Practice this by sending yourself tests in e-mail, you'll get it figured out pretty quickly.

    5. Re:M.C. Hammer TIME! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've been around the world
      From London to the Bay.
      It's "Hammer", "Go Hammer",
      "Yo Hammer", and the rest can go and play
      U can't touch this...

    6. Re:M.C. Hammer TIME! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Is it just me, or does the refrain to "Can't Touch This" sound a lot like Falco's "Der Kommissar"? Maybe this is a little off-topic, but I think the plethora of Hammer-related posts shows that he's still on some people's minds out there. Now that I think about it, they both remind me of Rick James's "Superfreak"...

    7. Re:M.C. Hammer TIME! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh yeah, and for all you non-Scots - the telephone is a communications device which lets you hear people over long distances, and the television is a sort-of screen, where you can see moving images which are sent over long distances through the air. Also, for non-Brits, the "web" is.... ok, enough sarcasm.

      Jeez, MC's enough of a star that *some* of the rest of the world know him. And the rest, who know enough english to be reading in the first place, can Google for it. At least you're anonymous so it's not whoring =) (btw, www.karmawhore.com is untaken, if anyone wants it)

    8. Re:M.C. Hammer TIME! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Customizing the Browser Window Toolbar The navigation toolbar at the top of the browser window can be customized to suit your needs and tastes. When you choose Customize Toolbar... from the Browser menu, a sheet will open containing buttons and other items you can add by dragging them into the toolbar. While the customization sheet is open, you can rearrange items on the toolbar by dragging them around or remove items by dragging them out. You can further customize your browser window using the items in the Browser Browser Toolbars sumbenu. The navigation bar (the one full of buttons), the location bar (an optional separate bar for the address field), and the Favorites bar can all be individually hidden or shown. Using Plugins OmniWeb's capabilities can be expanded by adding software components called plugins. A plugin can provide any number of things -- support for a new Internet protocol, a new pane for the Preferences window, or support for a particular image or media format, to name a few. In addition to plugins designed specifically for it, OmniWeb supports most components designed to the standard for Mac OS X web browser plugins. (In other words, it supports the Netscape/IE plugin API.) Note that only those Netscape/IE plugins which have been "Carbonized" for Mac OS X can be used with OmniWeb (or any OS X web browser, for that matter); plugins designed for earlier Mac OS versions can't be used. Alternatively, you can put OmniWeb-specific plugins directly into your copy of OmniWeb. This way, if you back up or copy OmniWeb to another disk or another computer, the plugins will come with it. When plugins are added, updated, or removed, it may be necesary to quit and restart OmniWeb for the changes to take effect. You can monitor the status of OmniWeb's plugins in Plugin Preferences.

  9. Windows at disadvantage? by PM4RK5 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Correct me if I'm wrong, but the only versions of windows that I know of that are 64-bit are the 64-bit WinXP and maybe versions of NT (but those were probably for Alpha anyway), which are now outdated.

    There are probably enough people like me that don't want to upgrade to WinXP just for 64-bit (I don't like lots of things about XP, but thats my opinion). So it would seem that Linux with Cross-platform portability (hence, x86-64) will have a better chance at propagating (spelling?) itself in to this market faster than windows.

    Just my opinions, not to be taken as fact.

    1. Re:Windows at disadvantage? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      NT for alpha was never 64 bit.

    2. Re:Windows at disadvantage? by Dave_bsr · · Score: 1

      The hammer line can handle 32-bit apps, even OS's I imagine. The problem with the itanic is that it doesn't. So, AMD is hoping people will see:

      Hammer = I can run all my old apps+advantages of 64bit computing (if I have the OS for it)

      Itanium = only Itamium apps. this sucks.

      Having the Hammer means you probably can still run win98...though why you'd want to anymore is another issue. I do agree with your conclusion about linux though - souce code makes it greatly portable. having the source code + gcc means you can instantly port old x86 apps to x86-64...unless my thinking is wrong. corrections anyone?

      --


      Who is this Anonymous Coward character, how does he post so much, and why is he always such a whore?
    3. Re:Windows at disadvantage? by megalomang · · Score: 1, Insightful

      The reason you know about the 64-bit Linux and IA64 Linux projects is because linux is open source. You don't know what Microsoft is cooking up because they are not open source. Just because you don't know what they are working on doesn't mean they are in trouble here.

      I don't think Linux' cross-platform portability has anything to do with their potential in this marketplace. The market is in somewhat of a fluctuation point. That means there is a new set of platforms out there, a new market, and a whole load of applications that need to be created. If there were no degree of backward compatibility, all products would need to be created from the ground up. That would put all software developers on level turf.

      However, since there is definitely a degree of backward compatibility (i.e. Hammer will run 32-bit apps, IA64 will run 32-bit apps in a lesser mode) the potential for Linux to wedge itself into the marketplace is not so great.

      Linux does have several things going for it however. First, workstations were historically Unix-based, and Linux will be accepted nicely. Workstations historically run X, so again, Linux is a natural. It is multi-platform, so users may be more likely to have used it before, thus more inclined to use it again (if they liked it of course).

      Linux has several things working against it though. First, NT-based OSs have a significant market share. As long as M$ has a product available, it will have no problem maintaining market share unless a competitor (i.e. IBM, Sun, etc) seriously markets Linux and does NOT offer an NT product as an alternative. Read: AMD is doing very little to push Linux by simply demonstrating it. Granted, they make silicon, not products, so either way they will have little influence over the acceptance of Linux over a competing OS.

      What Linux does for AMD is simply allow Hammer to be an alternative processor to Intel IA64. It forces M$ to directly support Hammer or resign to allowing Linux ownership of at least the market share that AMD has. It also forces companies who are trying to sell Linux solutions (again IBM, Sun, etc) to consider providing Hammer in their product line. In effect, AMD is using Linux as a tool. Linux is NOT using AMD as a tool.

      Linux will not be a beneficiary of this effort without a serious benefactor and some serious marketing funding.

    4. Re:Windows at disadvantage? by stubear · · Score: 1, Insightful

      OK, consider yourself corrected. Microsoft has been developing a 64-bit version of their Windows XP servers in sync with the 32-bit versions. They have been tested and do run on the Itanium line of processors. I'm not sure what the support for SledgeHammer will be because that would necessitate a large undertaking to either update the x86-32 Windows XP to x86-64 or to convert the IA-64 version of Windows XP over to x86-64 so it will work on the SledgeHammer processors. Microsoft may have to do this anyway(and could very well have started this process) as Intel is developing a SledgeHammer x86-64 compatible CPU in case McKinley doesn't do as well as hoped.

    5. Re:Windows at disadvantage? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      MS is selling plenty of copies of XP, and a lot of their bid for the datacenter is tied to XP. Whether or not you are interested in upgrading to XP has no bearing on whether or not the marketplace is interested.

      If 64-bit x86 computing takes off and MS has a product available, one should count their opportunity commensurate with their marketplace.

      I mean, come on already. I hate MS as much as the average /.er, but this is a ridiculous perspective to take on their chances.

      MS still takes in a lot of revenue in the general marketplace.

    6. Re:Windows at disadvantage? by Soko · · Score: 3, Informative

      FYI, Windows NT 3.51 and 4.0 on the Alpha were 32 bit still, not 64 bit. It was some sort of backward comaptibility 32 bit hack thing done with the compiler. (Aside: Anyone remeber FX/32 on the Alpha?)

      AFAIK:
      - NT code isn't 64 bit safe. 2000/XP I'm not sure of.
      - the 64 bit port of NT was developed on the Alpha, initially anyway, and then ported to the Itanium.
      - Alpha Linux has always been 64 bit. One of the earlier kernels had to be extensively revised to be 64 bit safe in order to run on the Alpha.

      Soko

      (O/T - The Alphas still killed the Intel machines at the time with MHz as well as memory and I/O bandwidth, which is why we used them. Oh well.)

      --
      "Depression is merely anger without enthusiasm." - Anonymous
    7. Re:Windows at disadvantage? by PaleGreen · · Score: 1

      Wrong! RTFF:
      http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/64bit/overview. asp
      "Most Windows-compatible 32-bit applications will run "as is" in a subsystem of Windows XP 64-Bit Edition."

    8. Re:Windows at disadvantage? by maxpublic · · Score: 1

      har har! That's a good one! I've seen about a third of the old apps break on WinXP - but I guess 2/3 is "most" by the strict definition, eh?

      Max

      --
      My god carries a hammer. Your god died nailed to a tree. Any questions?
    9. Re:Windows at disadvantage? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As linux users, we constantly hear about "lack of apps" being a negative. With the move to 64 bit cpu's, Windows and Linux have now switched places, and Linux is the old timer with lots of well tested, deployed applications, and windows is the newcomer with a version 1.0 operating system and exactly 0 applications for said operating system.

    10. Re:Windows at disadvantage? by sean23007 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      You may well be right. In fact, this could be AMD's way to get back at Microsoft. For so long, MS and Intel have been sleeping together, both helping eath other out in each other's industries, forcing the other computer manufacturers to use their products in computers.

      In the transition to 64 bits, if AMD can get there faster (and by there, I mean readily available to the consumer, not readily available to the bored millionaire), they can enlist Linux as their Microsoft and do the same thing to the market that has been happening for a decade: only with a free OS.

      Actually, I wouldn't mind, and I don't think many would.

      --

      Lack of eloquence does not denote lack of intelligence, though they often coincide.
    11. Re:Windows at disadvantage? by Rovaani · · Score: 1

      Why would AMD want to get back at Microsoft?

      They seem to be quite a happy couple... have you noticed the Windows XP / Athlon XP joint marekting...

      --
      Karma: Good! Napster: Baad!
    12. Re:Windows at disadvantage? by inburito · · Score: 5, Insightful

      What would you benefit from running a 64bit platform?

      Key applications for 64bit computing are more or less involved with anything that requires a huge amount of memory. Servers(massive databases), high-end engineering(airplanes, ships, etc.) and scientific computing come into my mind.

      In these kind of applications and systems you're not concerned whether or not you like windows xp but rather: how cost effective is it and what is the performance advantage?

      Unless your computers memory capacity is exhausted(what, 4 gigs is not enough for everyone?) and it is crunching numbers on full load 24/7 I don't see too many reasons aside the coolness factor to even consider 64bit computing. Heck, smp systems would make much more sense in most of the cases.

    13. Re:Windows at disadvantage? by PurpleFloyd · · Score: 1

      Oh yeah, with every single ad for Windows XP showing a Pentium 4 logo in the corner, and the words "Windows XP, with optimizations for the Pentium 4 Processor". Sounds like AMD and MS are real cozy to me!

      --

      That's it. I'm no longer part of Team Sanity.
    14. Re:Windows at disadvantage? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Right now, a much higher percentage of AMD chips ship with Microsoft OSes (home/soho sector) than Intel chips (server/business sector). Both Intel and MS pay their OEMs to flash the logos -- that has nothing to do with AMD currently being MS's buttboy.

    15. Re:Windows at disadvantage? by SK-null · · Score: 1

      And most of the work was done by Digital (and SGI for MIPS).
      But M$ already did a full 64 bit port of Windows for IA-64...

    16. Re:Windows at disadvantage? by Chep · · Score: 3, Informative

      FWIW, there are several "AMD64" conditional #defines in the Windows XP DDK.

      It's been pointed out for ages in the NT Insider Newsletter.

      My guess is: Microsoft doesn't work in a fishbowl like the Mozilla team does; but it must not cost them much to keep an IA-64->x86-64 port of XP64 ready, just in case (especially since I guesstimate the HAL should merely be a hybrid of x86 and IA-64, the compiler an extension of the x86 logic (much less difficult than VLIW and much well understood), and the code above HAL, once 64-bit clean, is (reportedly) written in compiled, not assembled, languages).

    17. Re:Windows at disadvantage? by cronio · · Score: 1

      Well, if you're gonna upgrade your computer to 64-bit (which most people won't bother doing, they'll just end up buying a new computer), you might as well spend a little bit extra to get an updated OS. People expect that anyway, if they're doing an expensive upgrade...after all, you're spending a bunch of money, you might as well spend a little more.

      --


      My plan is to pimp before they realize I'm a jackass. Hit 'em hard and fast.
    18. Re:Windows at disadvantage? by SurfsUp · · Score: 2

      ...this could be AMD's way to get back at Microsoft. For so long, MS and Intel have been sleeping together, both helping eath other out in each other's industries, forcing the other computer manufacturers to use their products in computers. In the transition to 64 bits, if AMD can get there faster (and by there, I mean readily available to the consumer, not readily available to the bored millionaire), they can enlist Linux as their Microsoft and do the same thing to the market that has been happening for a decade: only with a free OS.

      It's not nearly so subtle as that, it's recognition of Linux's huge position in the server market, where prices are high and 64 bits is a significant win for file caching.

      --
      Life's a bitch but somebody's gotta do it.
    19. Re:Windows at disadvantage? by phraktyl · · Score: 1

      I think I've seen this before:

      OS/2 = I can run all of my old Windows apps + all of the multithreaded OS/2 apps

      Windows = I can only run Windows apps

      Look who won that battle...

      --
      Karma: Marginal (mostly due to the border around the website)
    20. Re:Windows at disadvantage? by binaryDigit · · Score: 1

      a version 1.0 operating system and exactly 0 applications for said operating system

      Uh, wrong! All Win32 apps will run on 64bit XP. 64bit XP is a port of 32bit XP which is really just NT with a nose job, so wrong-o on all counts.

    21. Re:Windows at disadvantage? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      " I've seen about a third of the old apps break on WinXP - but I guess 2/3 is "most" by the strict definition, eh?"

      Interesting have you applied the service pack for compatibility then right clicked on the offending app and selected compatibility, ticked the little box labeled run in compatibility mode and selected what OS the program ran well in?

      Ya it's a bit of work but it worked for the few apps I have that didn't like 2K and then XP.

    22. Re:Windows at disadvantage? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      so... does that mean I can run my N64 games on it? their 64bit too...

    23. Re:Windows at disadvantage? by cronik · · Score: 1
      3D renders, Audio editing, Image editing, Video Editing, (fill in the blank) editing. Mem. is a huge factor in all these. Live editing 2 hours of high quality video /w audio is a bitch on 32 bit platforms. Now if someone would make a good AV NLE for *nix/*BSD (drool)

      --
      Information wants to be free like speech wants to be free, not like we want beer to be free.
    24. Re:Windows at disadvantage? by leviramsey · · Score: 1
      For so long, MS and Intel have been sleeping together, both helping eath other out in each other's industries, forcing the other computer manufacturers to use their products in computers.

      Microsoft's coziest relationship with Intel was in the 80's (MS helped design the 2, 3, & 486's, iirc). In the '90s though, the relationship has been wary. Each, to some extent, views the other as an obstacle to domination, but neither wants to try and freeze the other out.

    25. Re:Windows at disadvantage? by evil_one · · Score: 2

      And for cleaning up the big/little endian issues

      --
      Desperation is a stinky cologne
    26. Re:Windows at disadvantage? by SEE · · Score: 2
      OS/2: I can pay $$$ for an OS/2 license AND $$$ for a Windows license (whether directly or through IBM)

      Windows: I can pay for a Windows license for what the OS/2-alone license costs! And the Windows programs run faster, since I'm not running OS/2 in the background!

      --

      AMD: I can pay for a top-of-the-line x86 processor that also does 64 bits!

      Sun: I can pay for a top-of-the-line 64-bit processor!

      Intel: I can pay for a rather mediocre 64-bit processor that runs x86 code slower than my current computer, or I can pay for a x86 processor that only does 32 bits.

      --

    27. Re:Windows at disadvantage? by Per+Wigren · · Score: 1

      It didn't work with Grim Fandango and that's the only app (ok, game) I've tested it on...

      --
      My other account has a 3-digit UID.
    28. Re:Windows at disadvantage? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      People don't do number crunching on Win9x series, let's face it.

      Also, 64-bit means 64-bit registers as well as the address bus, no? Which should give a decent performance boost for most stuff.

      cheers,
      J

    29. Re:Windows at disadvantage? by inburito · · Score: 2

      I'd still say that unless you need to have over 4gigs of data in memory at any given point you probably are better off going smp or higher ghz on a regular platform. That 32bit limitation really is mostly a memory addressability one.

      I'm not saying that any of these applications couldn't benefit from 64bit processing and the extra registers that come with it but rather: it is going to be a lot more reasonable(cost effective) for at least few more years to come to stretch the limits of 32bit platforms in applications where that 4gig limit is not unmanageable.

      Actually, a lot of these applications are primarily going to benefit from increased memory bandwidth. Once the memory bandwidth equals cpu's fsb we could see full cpu i/o utilisation. This does not really happen even with 32bit platforms yet(Never mind when doubling the bandwidth requirements).

    30. Re:Windows at disadvantage? by fitten · · Score: 1
      It forces M$ to directly support Hammer or resign to allowing Linux ownership of at least the market share that AMD has

      I disagree with this statement. If Microsoft doesn't support Hammer, then those people who want 64-bit apps or who already run Linux will go to AMD if not already there. There are plenty of people who buy AMD processors to run Windows (and only Windows). There would be no reason for them to go to Hammer excepting the case where they are like me and just upgrade for the speed benefits :)

      Those who are already sensitive to cost/price are already running AMD processors. My prediction is this:
      • that the people who run Linux only will upgrade much quicker to Hammer than others.
      • Those who run Windows and Linux will continue to do so on whatever processor they have, but have potential to upgrade to Hammer.
      • Those who run Windows only may buy a Hammer for the performance benefits but will continue to run Windows.
      Whether Microsoft supports x86-64 or not cause people to flock to Linux and Hammer. There will possibly be a small shift for those who really want to run 64-bit apps but there aren't many of those. When you get down to it, Joe Sixpack probably doesn't care whether his app is 64-bit or 32-bit and probably doesn't know the difference anyway. In fact, there aren't many reasons for Joe Sixpack to even want 64-bit apps.
    31. Re:Windows at disadvantage? by fitten · · Score: 1

      For what stuff? a) you don't suddenly start using 64-bit ALU ops in your software, it has to be written/compiled to use them, b) what type of calculations will Joe Sixpack be doing that needs 64-bit values as opposed to 32-bit values? The only one I can think of (and even then it is a stretch) is games.

      Also don't forget that anyone who writes commercial software will have to Q/A on both 32-bit and 64-bit platforms if they decide to provide both AND that there will be a lengthy transition period from 32-bit to 64-bit where *many* people will still have the 32-bit processors. There will be little advantage to anyone other than server type apps (DBMSs/etc) (read: very expensive apps) to provide a 64-bit version of their software. I predict that even after Hammer is released, other than a few apps that will want to make use of the marketting hype, there won't be this exodus to 64-bit computing that so many here seem to think will happen.

  10. hammer time by ziggy_zero · · Score: 2, Insightful

    yeah, i've been waiting for this for a loooong time. god knows my next cad machine will be a dual sledgehammer. btw, sledgehammer is the multiprocessor one right? and the clawhammer is the single?

    --
    I belong to the ______ generation.
    1. Re:hammer time by Andrew+Coles · · Score: 2, Informative
      Clawhammer supports either single processor or dual processor operation. Sledgehammer supports 4 and 8 way multiprocessing.

      I plan to get a 2 processor Clawhammer box myself, it's the only reason I haven't upgraded for the past year. I'm bored of having a mainstream PC (P3 550MHz, don't ask...) after using a StrongARM/NetBSD box for a few years. Time for something novel and exciting - dual processor new fangled chip sounds like just the thing...

  11. Cuz its AMD... by jhaberman · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Ever notice, that once you break away from the WinTel monopolies... things just progress differently? I don't personally use Linux. I haven't had the time to sit down and really get into it. That doesn't mean that I don't like to see it gaining more run from hardware manufacturers and in the press. Competition always has, and always will be a good thing.

    Not to mention, 64 bit processing on a desktop would be reason enough for me to quit putting it off!

    Jason

    --
    He's totally creeping out the Great One, eh...
    1. Re:Cuz its AMD... by linzeal · · Score: 1

      What the hell do you need 64 bits on the desktop for?

    2. Re:Cuz its AMD... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      so he can download and manage his pr0n faster. Duh!!

    3. Re:Cuz its AMD... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      to look at more porn faster

    4. Re:Cuz its AMD... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      mmap()-ing big files.

    5. Re:Cuz its AMD... by archen · · Score: 1

      maybe so you're clock doesn't wrap in 2028 (or whenever) if you happen to use Linux/BSD for a desktop

  12. Why delay the hybrid? by guiding_knight · · Score: 3, Interesting
    Intel's Itanium processors handle 64-bit chips, but the Pentium family handles 32-bit applications. Sources have said that the company has a hybrid version, code-named Yamhill, in its labs.
    I realize that 64 bit computing is the rage now, but why not start with the hybrid? At least it would be compatible with today's progs.

    I do like the fact that AMD is planning on using "a smooth migration path to the 64-bit software of tomorrow", so we wont have to rewrite much of anything. Besides, I still like my old DOS games :)
    --
    LOTR: Elijah Wood is a munchkin asshat. Yes, asshat. LOL.
    1. Re:Why delay the hybrid? by Horn · · Score: 1

      So they can continue push the P4's. Intel doesn't want to compete with itself (remember the Tualatin (sp?)?) I just find it funny that they spend so much time bashing AMD's approach but on the other hand they have a backup in case they're wrong.

    2. Re:Why delay the hybrid? by Paul+Bristow · · Score: 2

      I realize that 64 bit computing is the rage now, but why not start with the hybrid? At least it would be compatible with today's progs.

      That's where linux has the advantage. Todays progs can jump straight to 64bit by the standard
      ./configure
      make
      make install

      So maybe it isn't point and click, but it is 64bit clean and ready to run.

      --
      - Paul
    3. Re:Why delay the hybrid? by Ent · · Score: 0

      I think you made the best point with your topic - they seriously need to get a hybrid out there so ISV's will even start thinking about making 64bit consumer apps.

      When you talk about "64 bit computing is the rage now" I have to ask exactly who is it the rage for? The million of desktop users out there needing a 64bit version of solitair? Or the ~150 odd companies out there looking to get rid of those bulky super computers? Who do you think is driving the industry?

    4. Re:Why delay the hybrid? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nonsense. There are numerous applications that store or transmit data in binary form, and unless they were VERY carefully designed they'll suddenly become incompatible with previous versions as type sizes change.

    5. Re:Why delay the hybrid? by thelizman · · Score: 2, Interesting

      As I understand it, Itanium and XP-64 will be able to run Win32 aps, but it will actually be more slowly than the same 64 bit apps, or the same 32 bit apps on a 32 bit processor (I'm sure I've got that bass ackwards, but who cares).

      Honestly, IMHO it seems that hybrid or "bridge" products meant to serve as vaseline for new technologies (allowing you to ease into it : ) usually wind up delaying the newer technologies and adding cost to the eventual transition. Apple did'nt write OS-X up to handle MacOS 9.1 apps, and in less than a year they've caught up with core products to an enthusiastic response from Mac users everywhere.

    6. Re:Why delay the hybrid? by Mr+Z · · Score: 1

      Depends on the ABI. If your ABI keeps sizeof(long) == sizeof(int) and sizeof(int) == 4, then you're ok. (This presumes you'll rely on long long for 64-bit integer objects.) What'll break for that model are apps that assume sizeof(long) >= sizeof(void *).

      The most likely model will probably make long 64 bits and keep int at 32. Anyone read up on the ABI for x86-64?

      --Joe
    7. Re:Why delay the hybrid? by Chris+Burke · · Score: 2

      Here's the ABI draft

      According to this, long is going to be 64 bits.

      I don't like that, actually. You can't really avoid problems with programs that make assumptions about data sizes, since you are basically stuck with 64 bit pointers, and thus some data size relationship has to change. But for many that use long to define a 32-bit type, they are suddenly going to get 64-bit types when they don't need it. That has the potential to do things like blow out your cache, which would hurt performance.

      For well-behaved programs, there shouldn't be any problem recompiling for 64-bit mode. There are some advantages to doing so, like being able to take advantage of the extra registers. For poorly-behaved programs... Well, just leave them in 32-bit mode, and they'll run just as well as before.

      --

      The enemies of Democracy are
    8. Re:Why delay the hybrid? by poopybum · · Score: 1

      They can't start with a hybrid because the entire industry is based on coercing consumers into buying the newest product. This is typically done with the lovely scare tactic of, "Spend the extra $1000 or this 'puter will be an anchor in six months." "64 bit?" they'll ask. "Sure," the salesman replies, "old computers were 32 bit -- these are now twice as good!" Bitter bitter young man

    9. Re:Why delay the hybrid? by Argon · · Score: 1

      You're a bit too late not to like it :-). The LP64 model has been around for ages. Right from the days of the Alpha six years ago.

    10. Re:Why delay the hybrid? by Chris+Burke · · Score: 1

      Hey, I don't like x86 proper, and that's been around even longer! :)

      --

      The enemies of Democracy are
    11. Re:Why delay the hybrid? by pengwinn · · Score: 1

      If you had all the cash that Intel has would you not hedge your bets too. That is just good business, odds are that Yamhill will never see the light of day.

    12. Re:Why delay the hybrid? by binaryDigit · · Score: 1

      because the entire industry is based on coercing consumers into buying the newest product

      Only one spreading FUD here is you. Intel started on this whole IA64 architecture route because in the mid 90's they were concerned that the clock rates (and performance) for the RISC chips (mainly Alpha) were advancing at a rate faster than they could keep up with the x86 ISA. So they decided to swallow up PA-RISC from HP and use parts of it and other VLIW technology to come up with a chip to carry them forward "after x86 maxed out". Well fast forward to now and there are P4's running at >2GHz and x86 looks like it has plenty of steam. So what is Intel to do, chuck the multi billion dollars spent working on the chip? Well no, you plug away at trying to increase the chips performance while you try to convince people to move up and hopefully things start looking rosier as things start coming together (good 64bit compilers, more ported apps, decent user base, etc).

      His argument above holds even less water when you consider that Intel isn't even trying to act like this chip is for the desktop market. Server folks like to see numbers, and if you can't produce, adios.

      People have been making the same claim since we moved from 16 to 32 bit. "We don't need 32bit, it's just Intels way to milking us". Yeah, right.

      As a side note, does Itanic remind anyone of another breakthrough processor from Intel that costs boat loads and completely flopped?

  13. 64-bit on the desktop? by maelstrom · · Score: 3, Interesting
    So is 64-bit for a normal user going to do much? I can definately see how some servers are pushing the 2^32 memory limit (2^36 with some hacks), but I find it harder to justify how I'll use it.

    I don't do much 3D rendering other than some gaming action, and my multimedia is limited to playing some MP3s while I'm coding with vim. Are there any other compelling reasons for a 64-bit arch? I suppose I could load more data in registers, storing two 32-bits into one 64-bit register.... but i'm drawing a blank... someone help :)

    --
    The more you know, the less you understand.
    1. Re:64-bit on the desktop? by DeadVulcan · · Score: 3, Funny

      So is 64-bit for a normal user going to do much?

      Extra computer power will always find a way to get used up in frivolous ways by the sex trade, trust me.

      --
      Accountability on the heads of the powerful.
      Power in the hands of the accountable.
    2. Re:64-bit on the desktop? by iangoldby · · Score: 1

      We'll all need 64-bit before Tue Jan 19 03:14:07 2038.

      That's when the 32-bit integer number of seconds since epoch 1970 used for time-processing on almost all UNIX-like systems hits the limit. Still, no-one will still be using 32-bit systems by then, will they? Er, right.

    3. Re:64-bit on the desktop? by Dave_bsr · · Score: 1

      There will always be a need for more computing power. I can say this because people have always been wrong before when they said we've hit the limit of our needs. it's like saying there's enough cool things to do with a computer now. Sure...it sounds like it might be true...but wait until tomorrow or next year or 10 years down the road to see what is new in CompSci, what cool things can be done. No one average person didn't imagine email or IM 30 years ago. Think where tech will be 30 years from now.

      Trust me...give a programmer the computing power to do something, and he'll do it. We haven't run out of ideas to implement yet, have we?

      --


      Who is this Anonymous Coward character, how does he post so much, and why is he always such a whore?
    4. Re:64-bit on the desktop? by furiousgeorge · · Score: 1, Flamebait

      >>That's when the 32-bit integer number of >>seconds since epoch 1970 used for time-
      >>processing on almost all UNIX-like systems hits
      >>the limit [deepsky.com].

      Funny. 32 bits talks about the addressing space that the processor can adress, not a particular variable type that was picked 30 years ago to store time.

      On my P4 i'm happily using __int64 data types which are (wait for it) 64 BIT INTEGERS. WEEEEEEE!! I must be magical.

      dumbass.

    5. Re:64-bit on the desktop? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "There will always be a need for more computing power. I can say this because people have always been wrong before when they said we've hit the limit of our needs"

      Not exactly a slave to logic are you? Not saying that's a bad thing.

    6. Re:64-bit on the desktop? by gmack · · Score: 2, Insightful

      You definatly don't want to do that in something as performance critical as a timming loop. The performance hit would huge on any 32 bit arch and doubbly so on something as register starved as x86.

    7. Re:64-bit on the desktop? by Just+Some+Guy · · Score: 3, Funny
      Are there any other compelling reasons for a 64-bit arch?

      Of course -- you can double your RC5 throughput and dazzle your friends. :)

      --
      Dewey, what part of this looks like authorities should be involved?
    8. Re:64-bit on the desktop? by VPN3000 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      " Trust me...give a programmer the computing power to do something, and he'll do it. We haven't run out of ideas to implement yet, have we?"

      I really have to disagree with you there. Computer power and graphics power are so far out ahead of what programmers are writing, it's rather sad.

      Just look around at graphical interfaces on computers. X11, Windows, etc. None of these run nearly as well as they should. {clicks to open a new netscape window and waits while the hard drive grinds away, geez 2 CPUs, ultra2 scsi, dual TNT2 cards, 1gig of ram and here I sit *grind grind*}.

      I agree that we will always need more power. More power to crunch through the, even more, bloated software of tomorrow. Please don't assume I am being flamebait here -- Just look at how little has changed from the first versions of MS Office to the modern-day MS Office. Not a whole lot of gain for a whole lot of bloat. This seems to happen across just about every part of the software industry.

      Call me on this if I am wrong.. Thanks.

      Victor

    9. Re:64-bit on the desktop? by renoX · · Score: 3, Informative

      64-bit on the desktop is next to useless IMHO, but the Hammer brings also many goodies:
      - it's fast
      - there are additional registers available which should help compilers quite a lot (avoiding false dependencies: more opportunities for executing more instructions at the same time)
      - it's fast.

      Ok maybe you could say that you don't need such speed, but the games you play don't look like Final Fantasy (the movie) and your opponents could really be smarter and I suspect that a good AI is very,very CPU-consuming.

    10. Re:64-bit on the desktop? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      With SIMD stuff you can go twice as fast.

    11. Re:64-bit on the desktop? by iangoldby · · Score: 1

      To clarify gmack, a 64-bit integer on a 32-bit processor is treated as two 32-bit numbers. That means add, subtract, multiply, etc all require multiple operations.

      I remember doing 16-bit arithmetic on the BBC micro, which used an 8-bit 6502 processor. Nothing wrong with it, but it is not nearly as efficient as native 16-bit arithemtic.

    12. Re:64-bit on the desktop? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I got the real live shit from front to back
      To my niggers in the world "Where the Fuck you at?"
      Where my niggaz iz at? Where my niggaz iz at?
      Where the Fuck my bitches at? Where my bitchez iz at?

      -homes

    13. Re:64-bit on the desktop? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      p.s.
      you aint gotta like me,
      you just mad cause I tell it like it is
      and you tell it like it might be.

      peace

    14. Re:64-bit on the desktop? by SpinyNorman · · Score: 2

      Extra computer power will always find a way to get used up in frivolous ways by the sex trade, trust me.

      Interesting!

      I never knew Microsoft was in the sex trade.

    15. Re:64-bit on the desktop? by HuguesT · · Score: 1

      Well, in French O/S is translated by
      System d'EXploitation. A little used but sometimes
      seen acronym for O/S in french is SEX.

      So yes, Microsoft is definitely in the SEX trade.

    16. Re:64-bit on the desktop? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      death is a small price to pay for respect

    17. Re:64-bit on the desktop? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Prison sex that is...(rimshot)

    18. Re:64-bit on the desktop? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh, and dont forget:
      - the hypertransport bus
      - hypertransport links between multiple procesors in a p2p way
      - the on die memory controler!

      For those who think the nvidia nforce is cool, think hypertansport traces between every chip that mathers on your motherboard ;-)

    19. Re:64-bit on the desktop? by kubrick · · Score: 2

      I never knew Microsoft was in the sex trade.

      When you deal with Microsoft, you just know that you're going to get screwed. :)

      --
      deus does not exist but if he does
    20. Re:64-bit on the desktop? by fitten · · Score: 1

      Joe Sixpack will neither know what this is nor care. Does it run his latest version of Deer Hunter(tm)? Does it run his email client? Will it let him surf pr0n? Which of these things need to be 64-bit?

    21. Re:64-bit on the desktop? by peter · · Score: 1

      He might care that it runs quake, or any other game, faster. AMD's hammer processors have a whole new FPU that is significantly faster than the stack-based x87 FPU.

      Of course people won't care if they don't do anything that depends on the speed of their computer. Nobody said that this is for everyone.

      --
      #define X(x,y) x##y
      Peter Cordes ; e-mail: X(peter@cordes , .ca)
  14. Late by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I remember a couple years ago that OS X was going to be the next big thing with this or that feature, but no one had actually seen it. This went on for a couple years.

    AMD's Hammer is the same way. We all wait with bated breath for the new processor to drop, but no one's seen it yet. It's surely not vapor because we know it's on its way, but how long do we need to wait? How far into the future should these things be announced.

    Hammer has been announced far too long in the past to be of any interest these days.

    Let's wait until it actually gets released and then discuss further.

    1. Re:Late by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What? So instead companies should wait until they start selling stuff before they announce it?

      Hammer hasn't been announced for sale yet so what is there to complain about.

      If AMD didn't announce it early then no-one in would have started coding for it - that means no 64-bit Linux for x86.

    2. Re:Late by Spazntwich · · Score: 1

      You don't deserve the one 'insightful' comment you got. You see, Hammer has recently started sampling to AMD's big customers, and AMD, VIA, and SiS have all announced chipsets for the hammer.

      Hammer's not nearly as far away as you seem to assume.

    3. Re:Late by Dr.+Spork · · Score: 2
      I know the article was terse, but it did say that they had this hammer chip running in a box at a trade show. That seems close enough to release to warrant us talking about it, especially when several key decisions need to be made now. For example, should we take the architecture seriously enough to try to optimize current software for it so they're ready when it's released? Windows seems to still be saying "no" and Linux people think "yes".

      I hope that with your "don't give it a thought until it's released" attitude you never get promoted to be a manager of some kind. You would suck!

    4. Re:Late by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You mean Merced er Itanium er McKinley
      Whatever.
      Your world has already begun to suck crusty ass; soon intel-drone X86-64 will destroy you

  15. But the real question is... by syzxys · · Score: 2, Insightful

    ...when will there be motherboards that support it?

    ---
    Windows 2000/XP stable? safe? secure? 5 lines of simple C code say otherwise!
    1. Re:But the real question is... by cdipierr · · Score: 2

      The current roadmap says availability of the chip in Q4, so you'd have to assume Q4 or Q1/03 for motherboards.

    2. Re:But the real question is... by syzxys · · Score: 1

      Doh, should have looked at that. Thanks.

      ---
      Windows 2000/XP stable? safe? secure? 5 lines of simple C code say otherwise!
    3. Re:But the real question is... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Dude, people have already posted 3 lines of code that can kernel panic almost any version of Linux. So removing your stupid sig would go a long way twards making you look a lot less like an idiot. Jst some friendly advice.

    4. Re:But the real question is... by Bert64 · · Score: 1

      As root perhaps, but i have yet to see a piece of code that can reliably kernel panic a linux box without running as root, and as root you could just call the halt command anyway.

      --
      http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!
    5. Re:But the real question is... by syzxys · · Score: 2

      I'm sorry you don't like my sig, but if you think being able to crash three major operating systems from an unprivileged account by using printf is "stupid" or equivalent to being able to take down Linux from a rooted box, you must not have much security clue. Anyone can crash any box in about 1 line from a privileged account, there's no fun in that. *nix hasn't had a security hole this bad, AFAIK, since the early 80's (I could be wrong on that though). So I think I'll keep it in my sig till I'm good and ready to take it out.

      Thanks for the advice though, free friendly advice is always appreciated. :-)

      ---
      Windows 2000/XP stable? safe? secure? 5 lines of simple C code say otherwise!
  16. Can't touch this by Magnusite · · Score: 4, Funny

    Argh, is this going to add yet ANOTHER set of addressing modes? Now we will have:

    mov ah, #1
    mov ax, #1
    mov eax, #1
    mov eeax, #1

    Seriously, I wonder how they have modified the register addressing field of the instructions to handle this.

    1. Re:Can't touch this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      I was just thinking the same thing I googlized my thought and found this a AMD Whitepaper. Looks like its ah, ax, eax, and rax.

    2. Re:Can't touch this by DeMorganLaw · · Score: 1

      Actually it will be RAX, according to the Hammer white paper:
      http://www.x86-64.org/documentation_folder /white_p aper.pdf.


      Perhaps it means, Really extended register?

    3. Re:Can't touch this by storem · · Score: 2, Informative

      Isn't that:

      mov ah, #1
      mov ax, #1
      mov eax, #1

      mov rax, #1

      Feel free to read the specs.

    4. Re:Can't touch this by rabidcow · · Score: 1

      and as for the actual encoding, they dropped all the 1-byte inc/dec operations (there have always been 2-byte alternatives to those) to use as a set of prefixes for 64-bit registers, as well as for the extra registers.

    5. Re:Can't touch this by ryanvm · · Score: 2

      mov ah, #1
      mov ax, #1
      mov eax, #1
      mov eeax, #1


      Damn, you know you're around smart people when something like this gets moderated '+4 Funny'.

  17. Cut to the chase by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    Shouldn't we forget 64 bit and go straight for 256 bit processor? Studies show that 4 out of 5 dentist prefer 256 bit processors.

    1. Re:Cut to the chase by fenix+down · · Score: 1

      Dentist #5 registered his preference for more advanced happy gas over a more advanced processor.

    2. Re:Cut to the chase by davidc · · Score: 1

      My dentist does not like to be bit at all, at all. Where you findin' all these multiply bit dentists??? :-)

  18. Offtopic Request to CmdrTaco by MicroBerto · · Score: 3, Insightful
    so you know...like...it only makes sense."
    When a user submits a good link, but includes lame garbage like this at the end, do you think you could modify it to look a bit better?

    I'm not sure which is better journalism though... on one end, you're looking more professional by not having stupid 14-year-old-girl talk on the front page. On the other end, you're cutting up someone's quote!

    I'd rather have it look nicer.

    --
    Berto
    1. Re:Offtopic Request to CmdrTaco by thelizman · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      What looks less professional: Leaving a submitted quote intact in keeping with journalistic integrity and accepted writing styles, or your making an off topic post calling 6'2", 250 lbs of US Army whoopass a "14 year old girl".

      Try to loosen up and have a bit of a sense of humor will ya.

      And don't worry, I'm still giddy about my first user submission to be accepted by slashdot so I won't hunt you down and put pink ribbons in your hair.

      And to think I "groused" in the recent katz thread about not having my posts accepted .

    2. Re:Offtopic Request to CmdrTaco by sharkey · · Score: 2

      When a user submits a good link, but includes lame garbage like this at the end, do you think you could modify it to look a bit better?

      Usually it's Taco's "lame garbage" at the end.

      --

      --
      "Outlook not so good." That magic 8-ball knows everything! I'll ask about Exchange Server next.
    3. Re:Offtopic Request to CmdrTaco by thelizman · · Score: 1

      Nah man, that was my lame garbage. I think when it's the mod's lame garbage, it's in normal text as opposed to my italicized lame garbage.

    4. Re:Offtopic Request to CmdrTaco by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He didn't call you a 14 year old girl, rather just called your style of writing similar to that of a 14 year old girl. Don't fuel a trolls fire by responding to their stupid posts, even if they did get a lot of attention. Be humble and accept that there are lots of people with way too much time on their hands.

      -Dick

    5. Re:Offtopic Request to CmdrTaco by sharkey · · Score: 2

      I know. I was just pointing out that the lame garbage is usually Taco's, rather than the submitter's. It wouldn't have been the first time someone didn't close an italics tag, either.

      --

      --
      "Outlook not so good." That magic 8-ball knows everything! I'll ask about Exchange Server next.
    6. Re:Offtopic Request to CmdrTaco by mark_lybarger · · Score: 1

      you're making quite a few big assumptions there. first, you assume the editors read the stuff they post. 9 times out of 10, that's not the case. secondly, you assume that the editors grammer would be better than that of the story submitter. thirdly, you assume these folks are journalists. they run a web site. they have a background programming mod perl to use mySql dbms. journalism? i'm not buying it..

  19. touching an AMD by Dave_bsr · · Score: 1

    I sometimes keep my case open and once in a while i'll touch-test my T-bird 1200 and Slot Athlon 500 (from back in the day) to see if my temp monitor is lying to me. they aren't too hot...really...I don't get burned or anything. Well, unless i leave the fan off but Tom told us that already.

    --


    Who is this Anonymous Coward character, how does he post so much, and why is he always such a whore?
  20. Designing the X86-64 architecture... by JPriest · · Score: 5, Informative

    Kevin McGrath (AMD senior tech) gave a great presentation at Stanford on the Hammer and how AMD took on many design concepts of the X86-64 architecture. This was probably one of the more informative lectures I have seen on the topic. The video is long though http://murl.microsoft.com/videos/stanford/ee380b/0 00927_ee380_OnDemand_100_100K_320x240.htm

    --
    Saying Java is nice because it works on all OS's is like saying that anal sex is nice because it works on all genders.
    1. Re:Designing the X86-64 architecture... by JPriest · · Score: 1

      to use the link remove the space in '0 00927'

      --
      Saying Java is nice because it works on all OS's is like saying that anal sex is nice because it works on all genders.
    2. Re:Designing the X86-64 architecture... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1
      What are you dumb? Click!

      Its real easy to do! just put <a href="the url goes here">link text</a> It that easy!

    3. Re:Designing the X86-64 architecture... by Strange+Ranger · · Score: 1


      Advanced Micro Devices, Inc. x86-64 Technology White Paper.

      Overview of strategy, some technical detail, "Long Mode" explained, nice charts, etc. Nicely done AMD.

      --

      Operator, give me the number for 911!
  21. 32-bit emulation? by brondsem · · Score: 1

    would a 32-bit emulation mode be plausible on a 64-bit machine? I'm guessing it would be have to be an app at the OS level.

    --
    "a quote" -me
    1. Re:32-bit emulation? by syzxys · · Score: 1

      There's a Pentium-compatible chip built into every Itanium. I guess that's one approach to "emulation." :-)

      ---
      Windows 2000/XP stable? safe? secure? 5 lines of simple C code say otherwise!
    2. Re:32-bit emulation? by gmack · · Score: 1

      AMD's 64 bit cpu doesn't need it. If the OS doesn't support it then the extra features doen't get used.

      It's backward compatable at the application level if the OS bothers to keep 32 bit compatabillity around.

    3. Re:32-bit emulation? by delta407 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Directly from the article:

      The Hammer family of processors will differ from other AMD chips--and other Intel processors--in that they will be able to run conventional 32-bit applications found on Windows PCs today as well as 64-bit applications.

      Perhaps we should read the article before we all run off and post ;-)

    4. Re:32-bit emulation? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There is NOT a pentium compatible cpu in every itanium -- it's worse. it VLIWs them into itanium instructions, and is really slow at it.

  22. AMD, i love you. by Narcocide · · Score: 1

    ...and while we're at it, let's get a round of applause for another example of how well open source compliments the forward progress of technology. all i can say is i'm anxiously awaiting SMP boards for these badboys.

    1. Re:AMD, i love you. by hawk · · Score: 2
      > all i can say is i'm anxiously awaiting SMP boards for these badboys.


      yeah, right. Just like the K-6 :)


      sure, our processor supports it. No, noone ever made a chip set, though . . .


      hawk

    2. Re:AMD, i love you. by Spy · · Score: 2, Informative

      Uhh, dude... You have no clue. Look into the Hammer a bit. The main point (more so than the 64bit stuff IMHO) is that it can do glueless SMP. I.E. no special chipsets need for =or 8 procs.

    3. Re:AMD, i love you. by Spy · · Score: 1

      Err, umm, I ment: equal to or less than 8 processors.

    4. Re:AMD, i love you. by hawk · · Score: 2
      Yes, so they say. This is AMD, though. They told us the K6 could do SMP, which it technicly could. They *eventually* popped out dual K7's (and we're taking another round at ordering mine today).


      I believe the hammer will ship. I'll believe in SMP hammer when a vendor demonstrates one . . .


      besides, it was a tongue-in-cheek wisecrack.


      hawk

  23. AMD's diminishing market advantage by JayDoggy · · Score: 3, Interesting

    AMD seemed for a while to be winning the price point war, getting to market at an extremely competitive cost for cutting edge hardware. According to my recent price-watching, however, this advantage seems to be diminishing, as Intel's lately been getting more competitive in their pricing in reaction to this. Maybe they're just going after the next buzzword in hopes of beating Intel at it's own game.

  24. Is x86 really the way to go? by jyasskin · · Score: 1

    Sure AMD is better than Intel in terms of price, but was it wise of them to stay with old, clunky x86?
    Pro: Maintain backwards compatibility -- irrelevant with Linux apps as long as the compiler is upgraded.
    Con: You still have to deal with only 8 general registers and CISC

    IA-64 just seems like a better ISA

    1. Re:Is x86 really the way to go? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      have you read anything about the x86-64 chip amd is developing? It sure looks like they were adding more general registers to me. But then I actually read what AMD says rather than taking intel's word for it.

    2. Re:Is x86 really the way to go? by AaronW · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Actually the Hammer series adds 8 more general purpose registers and more SSE registers. Read up on X86-64, there's more to it than just going 64-bit. For example, there's better support for relocatable code (i.e. shared libraries).

      --
      This post is encrypted twice with ROT-13. Documenting or attempting to crack this encryption is illegal.
    3. Re:Is x86 really the way to go? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      actually they have 16 gen registers..

    4. Re:Is x86 really the way to go? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well. It all depends on how you look at it.
      It still CISC, and adding a few extra regs and instructions won't help in the long run.

      Try look at how the processor is build. They read in the CISC instruction and then decode it into some RISC instr. and try (somewhat) to cache the result. All in all they have to add _alot_ of extra transistors, just to keep the X86 Compat -
      with no performance gain over a simple RISC arcitecture - try to compare at with the MIPS processor.

      X86 is a lousy design - no debate about it, but its cheap (due to large sales) and Windows use it .

      I wish they would add a bit to put it into CISC mode, in order to use a totally new instruction set, which is easy to use and optimize for.

    5. Re:Is x86 really the way to go? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


      Does that even matter?

      MIPS was better than x86, too.

    6. Re:Is x86 really the way to go? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      IA-64 is protected by patents, AMD can't clone it. They had no choice but to come up with their own 64-bit architechure.

    7. Re:Is x86 really the way to go? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you want a clean programming model, go with RISC. I looked at an ARM7xxx data sheet the other day; it had one or two pages of mnemonics in a widely spaced table - only a few more than the ARM2 series from '87.

      J

  25. oh no! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Suddenly I am overwhelmed with the feeling of being dirty. Much like after seeing that apple commercial where the kid is on the plane and he says.. "you like these guys too?" and then unplugs his headphones.

    WHO LET THE DOGS OUT?!

    oh god.. CAN'T... GET.... CLEAN!!!

  26. But it is not WinTel by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    How can it be WinTel if it is AMD running Linux? The term for this class of microcomputer is PC.

    1. Re:But it is not WinTel by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "How can it be WinTel if it is AMD running Linux? The term for this class of microcomputer is PC"

      Close, but no cigar. A more apt description of this type of machine is a POS.

    2. Re:But it is not WinTel by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Point Of Sale? That doesn't make sense...

    3. Re:But it is not WinTel by thelizman · · Score: 1

      The comparison was with Linux running on 64-bit processors in general (including Intel) as opposed to a WinTel Machine (Windows on Intel x86-64). I don't think my wording is that awkward, is it?

  27. Memory by Krieger · · Score: 2

    You want 64-bits on the desktop for extended memory. As the memory makers push memory sizes higher and higher the reality of having GBs of memory for your machine is quickly becoming a reality. I was scared recently when I found an ad for a Best-Buy machine for $1000 with 512MB of RAM. Since traditional 32-bit computing only does up to 4 GB of memory without extensions that's where 64-bitness comes into play.
    It also helps for file size issues as well as addressable partition size issues, all can now be done natively rather then as hacks.

    1. Re:Memory by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      x86 architecture has 36 bit addressing so 64 GB total memory can be addressed. A single process can only use 4 GB at once though.

    2. Re:Memory by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      . I was scared recently when I found an ad for a Best-Buy machine for $1000 with 512MB of RAM

      Pretty scary stuff indeed, did you run and hide or just scream outloud?

  28. FUD Sucks by Glonk · · Score: 1

    The hammer line can handle 32-bit apps, even OS's I imagine. The problem with the itanic is that it doesn't.
    No, Itanium can handle x86 applications as well.

    The problem is the current IA-64 processors run x86 very, very slowly. I imagine Intel would simply improve the x86 performance before trying to attack the desktop. It's not that big a deal for the high end server market they're aiming for right now.

    1. Re:FUD Sucks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah ia64 runs 32 bit x86 apps, if you consider running being executing them at the speed of a pentium 90. But then the powerpc executes 32 bit x86 apps faster than that. I'd say the ia64 is a piece of garbage.

    2. Re:FUD Sucks by Magila · · Score: 3, Interesting

      It's not just a simple matter for Intel to increase the Itanium's x86 performance. The reason it runs so slow is because it uses an emulation layer for x86 which is always going to be dog slow, the only way intel could fix it would be to do a major (as in almost complete) redesign. Hammer on the other hand can exicute x86 in hardware since it's 64-bit instruction set is a superset of x86. Itanium will likely never see the desktop, instead Intel will fork off another chip line for the consumer/workstation market (like the Pentium/Xeon lines today).

    3. Re:FUD Sucks by peter · · Score: 1

      IA64 processors can run IA32 in hardware, just not very fast. They actually boot up in IA32 mode, then switch to IA64. The reason it's slow is that they don't devote many transistors to the IA32 hardware. I don't know anything about it, but I wouldn't be surprised if the IA32 hardware is not superscalar (i.e. it has only a single pipeline.)

      I don't know if it would be faster to translate IA32 to IA64 on the fly, but probably not, given how much work a compiler has to do to optimize for IA64.

      --
      #define X(x,y) x##y
      Peter Cordes ; e-mail: X(peter@cordes , .ca)
  29. Go back to your Vic-20 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    After all, why would anyone ever need more than 8k of ram?

  30. 64-bit gotchas? by iangoldby · · Score: 1

    It's a nice idea. I wonder for how many programs it will work. I know one shouldn't but there are occasions when it's easier to write code that relies on integers overflowing in a certain way (and hence assumes they are a certain size). And what about C unions/structures where you assume you know the size of the various elements?

    What other gotchas are there to look out for?

  31. AMD was right to grab every DEC Alpha engineer by ejoe_mac · · Score: 3, Insightful

    AMD: Takes an existing archetecture and extends it with an excellent talent pool of engineers that speak in 64 bit.

    Intel: Buys its way out of a lawsuit for stealing 64bit microcode from the DEC Alpha, then buy's the Alpha from Compaq to discontinue it. Then create a brand new 64 bit chip using their own limited talent, while shoving the existing 64 bit platfrom into an early grave.

    Does this make sence to anyone? Alpha's rock, and they have been 64 bit for years. There already was versions of Win2k, Linux and Unix in addition to major apps like SAP and Oracle tuned for the platform.

    1. Re:AMD was right to grab every DEC Alpha engineer by edrugtrader · · Score: 1

      yeah, i had a 1ghz 64 bit alpha in 98. that was the sheot back then. only cost like $900 too... i don't know why they didn't catch on.

      --
      MARIJUANA, SHROOMS, X: ONLINE?! - E
    2. Re:AMD was right to grab every DEC Alpha engineer by Tuzanor · · Score: 3, Informative

      Winsows NT was ported to alpha, 2k was never (or at least never released).

    3. Re:AMD was right to grab every DEC Alpha engineer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Also, as per usual you forget that NT on Alpha was a 32 bit operating system, not 64. Microsoft has yet to do what Linus did in 93 or so, and that is produce a working, stable, 64 bit operating system.

    4. Re:AMD was right to grab every DEC Alpha engineer by Telastyn · · Score: 3, Interesting

      If I remember correctly, one of the things AMD picked up from the Alpha Engineers was memoryCPU tech that has already been used on the MP boards. Each CPU has it's own memory link, so they don't fight or clog one.

      AFAIK Alphas died because of business problems, not technical ones.

    5. Re:AMD was right to grab every DEC Alpha engineer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He never said that it was 64 bit, you fucking douchebag. He merely said it was ported to the alpha.

    6. Re:AMD was right to grab every DEC Alpha engineer by arri · · Score: 1

      Intel: Buys its way out of a lawsuit for stealing 64bit microcode from the DEC Alpha, then buy's the Alpha from Compaq to discontinue it. Then create a brand new 64 bit chip using their own limited talent, while shoving the existing 64 bit platfrom into an early grave.

      The above is an incorrect statement: the first lawsuit between Intel and Digital was over the Pentium Pro and the breach of a number of VAX CPU (CISC) patents, if I remember correctly in the specific area of cache management (possibly because the Pentium Pro CPU was the first to have an on-die L2 cache).

      The lawsuit was settled with Intel agreeing to buy Digital's networking group (ie. the chaps who built hubs and the like) and an old fab which was manufacturing Alphas but would soon be out of date.

      What happened recently is that Compaq (which in th e meantime purchased Digital and Tandem) sold off the Alpha to Intel. There are a number of rumours regarding this sale, mainly in the field of Intel purchasing Alpha to make Itanium work - allegedly Itanium II is going to "include" a number of Alpha technologies. At least this is what I've been told at a number of Compaq "technical briefs" (aka PR events or free lunches).

    7. Re:AMD was right to grab every DEC Alpha engineer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Your ideas are intriguing and I wish to subscribe to your newsletter.

    8. Re:AMD was right to grab every DEC Alpha engineer by VAXman · · Score: 2

      Nope, the patents which DEC sued over Intel for were all Alpha technologies not VAX. The last VAX CPU's were made in the early 90's and were quite a bit less sophisticated than P6. FYI, P6's L2 was off-die.

    9. Re:AMD was right to grab every DEC Alpha engineer by TheAwfulTruth · · Score: 2

      Well you got 1/2 of it right there. The other half being, supporting multiple processors is a PITA. I did a little alpha/x86 porting and besides the fact that the REAL alphas were more like 2-5 grand (Though the low end alphas were 500-1000) The immense added cost for relatively little power gain AND the added pain of maintaing multiple releases just wasn't worth it. When the users refused to pay for the alphas, that pretty much sealed it.

      --
      Contrary to popular belief, coding is not all free blow-jobs and beer. Those things cost MONEY!
    10. Re:AMD was right to grab every DEC Alpha engineer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >Winsows NT was ported to alpha, 2k was never (or at least never released).

      win2k it does support 64bit. it was an extra $1k to get the support if I remeber right.

    11. Re:AMD was right to grab every DEC Alpha engineer by mikefoley · · Score: 2, Informative

      Unless you worked at API (formerly Alpha Processor Inc.) in *1999*, you didn't have a 1GHz Alpha. And it for damned sure didn't cost $900.

      http://news.com.com/2100-1001-227510.html?legacy =c net

      There was ONE or two 1GHz Alpha's mounted in a SlotB format at API in *1999*. These had to use 250MHz cache (at a 1:4 ratio). Limitations in the Tsunami chipset didn't favor anything more than an 833MHz. This meant that with the slow cache and Tsunami limitations, the 1GHz was like putting a Corvette engine in a Cavalier. Goes fast doing only one thing. Don't take a corner.

      Those one or two 1GHz Slot B's were proto's. They are probably still on my former desk or in the lab or maybe have been shipped back to Korea by now. API closes its doors this week from what I've heard.

      I worked at API.

      --
      What's my Karma Mr. Burns? "Excellent"
    12. Re:AMD was right to grab every DEC Alpha engineer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not quite true.

      Cabletron, not Intel bought the remnants of the Digital networking products group. As part of the settlement, Intel did agree though to buy an old Digital fab.

    13. Re:AMD was right to grab every DEC Alpha engineer by bgarcia · · Score: 2
      Then buy's the Alpha from Compaq to discontinue it.
      That happened after development started on Itanium, not before.
      Then create a brand new 64 bit chip using their own limited talent,
      Actually, they used a lot of HP's limited talent. Remember that development of this chip was a team effort between Intel and HP.
      --
      I'm a leaf on the wind. Watch how I soar.
    14. Re:AMD was right to grab every DEC Alpha engineer by randombit · · Score: 1

      2k was never (or at least never released).

      Actually, it was released in beta form. I have 2-3 copies of W2K for the Alpha, RC2 era or so. Got them in a big box of MSDN CDs that were getting thrown out at work [I just grabbed the whole box in the hope there would be something good :P]

  32. It is called competition. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It is free-market competition. We're lucky to have it on the PC platform where there are just two major chip makers, but it works nonetheless and quite well as Intel and AMD try to outdo each other with faster and better and cheaper chips. If only the OS arena were like this!

    1. Re:It is called competition. by +junis_al_barek_ash_ · · Score: 1

      You don't really want that(same competition w/OSes). Tell you why - notice how long it takes to get decent stable software now, from any vendor, not just M$, and including Lameux(patches not properly included, software of generally poor quality feature wise and overall polish & usability) Multiply that by 2 or 3 times as long, with the same quality and I'll bet you'll come back crying for your monopolies

      --
      Internet is Great!!! junis
  33. moderator complaint by Dave_bsr · · Score: 1

    I think this is funny. It's a sarcastic declaration, and obviously not serious. Even if it was serious, modding the troll up only makes him look retarded and be a frustrated troll, that isn't all bad is it?

    --


    Who is this Anonymous Coward character, how does he post so much, and why is he always such a whore?
  34. x86-64 ISA by CFN · · Score: 1

    I was wondering if AMD has released a reference to the ISA for the Hammer architecture, because without knowing what it looks like, I have many, many questions.

    For instance, will the hammer have a modern ISA, like the IA-64, i.e. general purpose registers, speculative execution, predicate bit, VLIW, or will it be an extension of the current x86 ISA,

    If its the former, with x86 to Hammer translation at the instruction decode phase, AMD will be offering a useful solution: run your current apps now, and slowly replace them with the new version of them.

    If its the latter, where the chip is just a 64-bit extension to the x86, it doesn't seem like they are offering much, just "hey, I have a 64bit CPU" bragging rights and can address more memory.

    In either case, Linux users won't really gain much from supporting the old ISA: they'll choose the fastest hardware and type 'make'.

    1. Re:x86-64 ISA by e4liberty · · Score: 1

      Take a look at this anandtech article ; it has many details.

    2. Re:x86-64 ISA by SK-null · · Score: 1

      Extension. Check www.x86-64.org for some doc.

  35. Threat to Sun by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    AMD will enjoy a short period of incredible success with Hammer, its 64-bit 0x86 architecture. Intel will see the success and immediately release its own 64-bit extension to the basic IA32 architecture. Both chips will be the foundation of commodity, ultra-low cost, servers.

    These servers will annihilate Sun in the low-end to mid-range portion of the server market. These servers will gradually creep into the high-end of the server market, where machines having 32 or more processors dominate.

    Sun has seen the writing on the wall. As a last desperate measure, Sun has announced that it too will sell Intel/AMD-powered servers running Linux more than 1 year after IBM has been successfully doing the same.

    Just look at the performance data at SPEC and TPC . The x86 processors crush UltraSPARC III across a broad range of benchmarks.

    1. Re:Threat to Sun by afidel · · Score: 2

      Oh yeah like a specfp2000 of 827 for the Sunblade model 2050 vs a specfp2000 of 802 for a P4 2.2Ghz Dell Precision workstation. Note that the sparc cpu is running at less than half the speed of the p4.

      --
      There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order. Starting now.
    2. Re:Threat to Sun by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Note that I can't afford the sparc.

      I'll buy AMD instead, and you can suck on my balls.

    3. Re:Threat to Sun by BinxBolling · · Score: 2

      1) The numbers you quote are "peak"numbers, obtained by optimizing for the particular test being run. The "baseline" numbers are probably a better approximation to what you'll see in real world use. Here, the story is reversed: The Dell scores 779 vs. the Sun's 701.

      2) SPECFP? What about integer performance, which is more important for most applications. On SPECINT2000, the Dell whips the SunBlade both in baseline (790 vs. 537) and peak (811 vs. 610) performance measurements.

      3) How about price/performance? I can't find any mention of the Sun Blade 2050 on Sun's site. However, the 900 MHz Sun Blade 1000 (which is slower than the 2050) goes for $11,000. I can get the Dell with similar amounts of memory and HD space for $2500.

      4) How does the Sparc's better performance / clock make it a better CPU? Is there some intrinsic value to clock cycles that I don't know about?

      Look, I think there are good reasons in some cases to buy Suns over commodity Intel hardware. And there's probably a good argument to be made that these benchmarks don't correspond well to any real world performance, anyways. But you're just fooling yourself if you think that Sun beats out Intel when it comes to raw performance as measured by benchmarks.

  36. The Hybrid isn't delayed by Krieger · · Score: 3, Informative

    x86-64, which is what AMD is shipping with Hammer *IS* a hybrid. It is a x86 processor with 64 bit instructions added on top of the 32 bit ones. Like Intel's extension of x86 from 8 bit to 16 and later 32 bitness. It allows backwards functionality, and forward extensibility through 64 bit applications that might need it. I think it's a much more intelligent solution as there are a lot of applications that don't need 64-bitness...

    1. Re:The Hybrid isn't delayed by baka_boy · · Score: 1

      Hmm...sounds a lot like the AltiVec engine that's been in G4 chips for the last, what, two years?

      Wow, what will those "innovators" at AMD and Intel think of next?

    2. Re:The Hybrid isn't delayed by The+Man · · Score: 1, Flamebait

      Typical Mac idiot. Forward and backward compatible CPUs started much longer in the past. The 680x0 are all backward-compatible. The transition from SPARC v7 to v8 and then to 64-bit v9 also left userland applications fully compatible across the full range of CPUs. MIPS CPUs starting with the R4000 have 64-bit capabilties but can actually run either 32-bit or 64-bit operating systems and userland. There are plenty of other examples dating back 10-20 years or longer of large changes, including register length and pointer size, made to architectures without breaking existing user applications (in some cases without breaking existing operating systems). G4 is a latecomer to this game, as are these offerings from Inhell and AMD.

    3. Re:The Hybrid isn't delayed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nope, the AltiVec extension just throws in some special instructions, just like MMX, VIS or 3DNow! before it. The x86-64 recasts the entire ISA to use 64-bit data types, pointers, etc., while maintaining backwards compatibility with IA32 + extensions.

    4. Re:The Hybrid isn't delayed by Bert64 · · Score: 1

      The 680x0 were not all fully backwards compatible, some rarely used functions were only present in the 68020 for instance, also the presence of a cpu cache on the 68020 and above made some older 68000 apps fail. Also the 68040 included a stripped-down version of the 68881 FPU (risc style), which required software emulation to fill in the gaps, and resulted in poor performance unless the code was recompiled. The 68060 did this with the integer unit aswell, and also added a second integer unit.
      The G4 and the ppc range as a whole, were the (incompatible) replacements for the 680x0 range.

      --
      http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!
    5. Re:The Hybrid isn't delayed by mandolin · · Score: 3, Informative
      Like Intel's extension of x86 from 8 bit to 16 and later 32 bitness.

      *cough* nitpick: x86 began as a 16-bit architecture; when you say "8-bit" you're probably thinking of the 8088 which had an 8-bit external data bus and which IBM used in their PC because, basically, they were doing their motherboards on the cheap.

    6. Re:The Hybrid isn't delayed by civilizedINTENSITY · · Score: 1

      *cough* nitpick: actually it all started with a 4-bit video text editor, the 4004

  37. What's so great about 64 bit? by DodgyGeezer · · Score: 1

    I remember the step from 16 to 32 bit was enormous. There were many benefits for everyday situations. 32 bit still seems pretty good right, which couldn't be said about Win3.1 at anytime. What will a 64 bit version of Windows offer to the average Wordprocessor user? The comment on the story claims that Linux will have 64 bit apps before Windows... what are the benefits to the majority of people of 64 bit apps? Not many of us need to address more than 4 GB of memory.

    1. Re:What's so great about 64 bit? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This one goes to 65.

    2. Re:What's so great about 64 bit? by Aexia · · Score: 2

      >>Not many of us need to address more than 4 GB of memory.

      Three years ago, I thought I was partially insane for getting a laptop with 128 MB of RAM. Turns out my insanity was a good thing.

      Today, I'm thinking I'm partially insane for getting a machine with 1 GB of RAM. I'll undoubtedly be congratulating myself for my foresight in a couple years when Windows ZZ requires that much to operate.

    3. Re:What's so great about 64 bit? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Not many of us need to address more than 4 GB of memory.


      Right, and in 1985, not many applications needed to address more than 64kb of memory. Sometimes demand needs to be driven by availability, not the other way around.

    4. Re:What's so great about 64 bit? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      By 1985 Lotus users were routinely hitting the 640K limit. And the spreadsheet was the "killer app" at the time. The killer app for these things seems to be retiring your Sun servers, but I don't see many desktop apps hitting the 4GB wall within the next couple years.

    5. Re:What's so great about 64 bit? by afidel · · Score: 2

      I've had a machine with 1.5GB of ram for over 6 months now. I got my first new pc in dec 93, it was a 486-sx25 with 8MB ram. This is ~96 months or 5.3333 doublings given an 18 month doubling period, so in theory I should have 1.25GB by now. I think that moores law is not going to slow down any time soon (at least 5 years) so we have ~3 years before natural progression gets us past the 32 bit limit.

      --
      There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order. Starting now.
    6. Re:What's so great about 64 bit? by cmkrnl · · Score: 1

      "Windows ZZ " will be the Tops.

      When you click on the Install button, the cd drawer opens to reveal a mystical shiny keyring, & 3 blonde babes step out of the 1933 3 window Red coupe it came in and shag the living daylights out of you.

      12 hours later 3 dudes with beards and dusty clothing appear on the scene to spirit them away to another lucky installer.

      You'll never feel like using Windows ZZ again, because your Legs are tired after Giving it All Your Loving.

      You were a Sharp Dressed Man, but after after all the rolling around the Rio Grande Mud, you'll now have to hitch a lift into La Grange, wearing those Cheap Sunglasses and buy a new Silk Shirt, Black Tie.......

      Curmudgeon.

  38. groan. by jeffehobbs · · Score: 1


    whoever makes a "too legit for 64-bit" joke next wins.

    ~jeff

  39. Hammertime? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    Does every processor sold come with a free pair of parachute pants?

  40. Backwards compatible to.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    ...1978

    I wanna boot CP/M on it!!! I wanna boot CP/M on it!!! I wanna, I wanna, I wanna!!!

  41. AMD/Intel in the press by Mystarim · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Has anyone else noticed that the one-screen article about AMD's Hammer line of processors on C|Net is far shorter than C|Net's Intel Itanium article it links to?

    The AMD article is a simple response to a press release. The Intel article is a prose editorial about the state of the industry and where Intel's new processors (might) fit in.

    --
    Tim Garthwaite mailto:tim@garthwaite.org
    1. Re:AMD/Intel in the press by TheAwfulTruth · · Score: 2

      Because Hammer is nothing to write about. It's a 64 bit x86. Whee. Itanium is a completely different beast. There's a hell of a lot more to write about about the new Itanium archetecture and it's possiblilities than just taking x86 to 64 bit.

      --
      Contrary to popular belief, coding is not all free blow-jobs and beer. Those things cost MONEY!
  42. x86 finally makes it! by ColdGrits · · Score: 1

    So x86 finally reaches 64-bit.

    Welcome, folks. Mind you, having been using a 64-bit native OS on a 64-bit CPU for 3 years now (Solaris on UltraSPARC - of course, the UltraSPARC has been 64-bit for around 10 years now), I hope I'm not racing way ahead of you there...

    Tell you what, do let me know when you can SMP 106+ of those beasts together, then we'll talk. Deal?

    :-)

    --
    People should not be afraid of their governments - Governments should be afraid of their people.
    1. Re:x86 finally makes it! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Jealous that you won't be a 64-bit elitist anymore?

    2. Re:x86 finally makes it! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Play with sunsolve; Solaris can do 576 cpus in a single system image. E15Ks hold 72 cpus or 106 with severe limitations. Quick math shows us that 576 / 72 is equal to 8. That's 8 E15Ks linked together. Sun bought the CS6400 computer from Cray, I think they might have learned something...

      I talked to my Sun rep about what I found in sunsolve. He seemed a little aprehensive. He admitted little, but said that they had scaled Solaris linearly.

  43. on servers it is welcome by MS · · Score: 1
    not on the desktop, but on webservers used by e-commerce sites crypting data for ssl-transmission it is welcome.

    ms
    --

  44. Uh-Oh by Alan+Partridge · · Score: 2, Funny

    here comes the HAMMER

    --
    That was classic intercourse!
  45. But was it running *64 bit* Windows? by Namarrgon · · Score: 3, Interesting
    Can anyone confirm if Win64 is definitely being released for the Hammer?

    The PR is vague enough to be interpreted as "running a 64-bit version of Linux as well as [plain old 32 bit] Microsoft Windows". I've asked AMD flat out, and they will not commit to saying yes, Win64 will be coming to the Hammer party. MS certainly haven't mentioned it, AFAIK.

    As a film/video FX developer, we'd love the massive memory space & 64 bit registers that Hammer brings. But as a [currently] Windows-only app, Linux-64 isn't helpful (except possibly for a few customers' render farms).

    Our code is 64-bit clean, we have a working Itanium port, but we haven't sold a copy yet. We have customers who need multigigabytes of RAM & the speed of an Athlon to process it all, yet don't have the spare kilobux to justify dedicating a dual Itanium to a single app (it's all but useless for 32 bit apps at Winzip level & up).

    So... rumours, anyone? Hard facts? Tidbits, gossip, insider info?

    --
    Why would anyone engrave "Elbereth"?
    1. Re:But was it running *64 bit* Windows? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      MS's approach for other alternate CPUs (PPC, Alpha, MIPS) was to have the company making the CPU pay them lots of money, sign lots of NDAs, and then port the OS themselves. If the deal was done, we would have certainly heard about it by now (esp because SuSE/AMD64 has already been demoed)

    2. Re:But was it running *64 bit* Windows? by Svartalf · · Score: 2

      They've not gotten there yet, to the best of my knowlege. It might be time, if your company's a major customer for that app of yours, to talk them into doing a Linux version of the application- they'll thank you for it because it'll run on anything Linux does.

      --
      I am not merely a "consumer" or a "taxpayer". I am a Citizen of the State of Texas
    3. Re:But was it running *64 bit* Windows? by writertype · · Score: 1

      Nope, it was running Windows XP, according to the article on ExtremeTech.com.

    4. Re:But was it running *64 bit* Windows? by bmajik · · Score: 2

      he asked if anyone had any insider info or knowledge about it.

      what would qualify you to know wether or not microsoft has windows running on x86-64 ?

      do you work at amd ? do you work at MS ? i suspect that at either of those places, you wouldn't be allowed to talk about it if they _did_ have it working.

      he asked for insider info on the status of win64 on amdx86-64, and you give him a post about porting his software to linux.

      so, what reason do you have to belive that you know what the status/existance of that project may or may not be ?

      --
      My opinions are my own, and do not necessarily represent those of my employer.
    5. Re:But was it running *64 bit* Windows? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I guess Windows 64-bit support might depend on Sander's deposition at the MS trial...

    6. Re:But was it running *64 bit* Windows? by Namarrgon · · Score: 2
      WinXP runs on the Itanium, too - it's just the 64-bit version. Any x86-64 compile would certainly be WinXP, but it could just as easily be the IA32 version.

      Thanks anyway :-)

      --
      Why would anyone engrave "Elbereth"?
    7. Re:But was it running *64 bit* Windows? by Namarrgon · · Score: 2
      Perhaps, but perhaps not. A deal like that would likely preclude any announcements by AMD until MS was good & ready.

      Of course, if a monopoly verdict doesn't encourage MS's readiness to announce support of non-Intel platforms, I don't know what will...

      --
      Why would anyone engrave "Elbereth"?
    8. Re:But was it running *64 bit* Windows? by Namarrgon · · Score: 2

      My company's the developer of that app of mine. And a Linux-64 port would leave our customers with the same problem they have with Itaniums - no way to run their other Win32 apps.

      --
      Why would anyone engrave "Elbereth"?
  46. Do you download DVDs or Encode? by HanzoSan · · Score: 2


    When you start doing file sharing by the gigs, and yes you will with a fast machine and you want to handle those files, you'll have problems when your machine can only handle certain file sizes.

    More bits also means programs can do stuff like encode big files faster.

    --
    If you use Linux, please help development of Autopac
    1. Re:Do you download DVDs or Encode? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Good ol 32-bit Windows supports files and volumes up to 2TB in size. Stop pulling your pud.

  47. retard by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ya, good job ..
    Har Har

  48. Normal users dont need ghz cpus by HanzoSan · · Score: 3, Interesting


    Well the normal could do fine with a pentium 200 and 64 megs of ram.

    64bit is for the power user, people who want gigs of ram, huge harddrives, people who trade media like dvd movies, who edit movies, who play games, who run alot of programs at the same time, or who just want more speed, they want state of the art.

    --
    If you use Linux, please help development of Autopac
    1. Re:Normal users dont need ghz cpus by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You seriously think that people who download movies and play video games are "power users"? Har.

      Anyway, most of those people run Windows which will only run on Hammer in 32-bit mode.

    2. Re:Normal users dont need ghz cpus by kesuki · · Score: 1

      I hate to argue with you here but.. If you've ever been to some of the sites normal people go to like MSN gaming zone or pogo.com you'd realize those lille ActiveX Java apps slow a 200 mhz system to a crawl to the point where the mouse cursor sticks on the screen.
      My parents are finally having me build them a system because they keep buying these lame systems Designed 'for normals' that become worthless in 3 years time as the latest and greatest in web technology is released.
      I've decided on an AMD XP 1700+ processor, I was originally going to go with 512 MB of RAM but then prices trippled so that got scrapped. They Are getting a 7200 rpm drive even though they're 'normal' users. I haven't decided on which motherboard to get them yet, But I've got my eye on one of three, and all of the boards are known for speed and reliability, although one is more than 6 months old. I'm trying to decide if it's worth saving ~$80 going with a chipset that's 5% slower or not.
      At anyrate the system I'm putting together for them will still be better than the ones wal-mart is selling a year from now so I'm sure they're going to be using this PC for a long, long time.

    3. Re:Normal users dont need ghz cpus by Sgt+Pinback · · Score: 1

      Well the normal could do fine with a pentium 200 and 64 megs of ram.

      My mother is getting to the limits of her 400MHz/64MB machine, mostly when doing graphics stuff (she uses a scanner to archive all sorts of images). So, even "normal" people can make use of powerful computers.

      --

      --

      I do not like the men on this space ship!
  49. Are you sure? by HanzoSan · · Score: 2



    Blame the programmer or blame the motherboard?

    The speed of your ram is the problem, the harddrive wont grind iff you have gigs of ram and you are using a scsi raid system unless your ram is just slow.

    so if your system is fast, why is netscape slow ? Fact is its not a good example of a slow program, nautilus is a good example of a slow program.

    Little has changed because theres a monopoly,
    Things wont change unless you make changes, join the open source movement and develop something new.

    I'll tell you how i'd use the CPU, automation, AI, and stuff like that to make my computer do self healing,to make it solve problems, to the point where i can tell it to find information on say, star trek episode 10 and it automatically opens netscape in the backround runs a few search algorithms and looks for information for my research.

    This could be done using an agent.

    --
    If you use Linux, please help development of Autopac
    1. Re:Are you sure? by borat · · Score: 1

      I have notice my hard drive making that grinding noies every time i run a program. The comp-usa guy told me that it was due to fragmention(?) where programs end up getting lost on the drive and the computor has to spend a lot of times searching on the drive for the missing peaces. Even if you have the fastest kind of ram it still dosent mean that the data on the drive isnt missing.

    2. Re:Are you sure? by jamesconf · · Score: 1

      Do not lisson to Compusa guys

    3. Re:Are you sure? by VPN3000 · · Score: 1

      This may extend a tad off the topic, so mod me however. I do not think the speed of RAM and programmers themselves have much to do with it, as RAM is pretty fast and the programmers tend to be a wise bunch.

      Programmers tend not to want bloated code. There's no pride taken in an application that is slow and buggy, but deadlines, marketing, a lack of oranization between groups on the project, etc. tend to result in a hacked together application that could use a lot of optimization (aka, bloated and slow).

      I do agree with your position on open sourced projects being more efficient. The open source world doesn't live by deadlines assigned by non-technical people.

      I think this combined with the need to show off one's artistic ability to code result in a much better end product; albeit a lot slower to the market place and pissed on by a monopoly's marketing and patented features. :(

      I'm estatic about doing my first 'make world' on a dual 64bit CPU box. That'll be a far cry from the old dual 700.

      Victor

  50. THANK YOU by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Finally, someone with some education who knows how to use this language we all claim to use.

    This must be the first time I've seen anyone in a discussion forum post use 'bated' and not 'baited'.

  51. 64 bit proc = extreme heat? by I_am_Rambi · · Score: 1

    I would enjoy a 64 bit proc, but my question is how much heat will it produce? A friend of mine just bought a new AMD and the cooling fan melted off the heat sink and then not only the processor burned but also the new board. According to Toms Hardware AMD processors are more prone to burnt logic. See for yourself Will AMD have a better thermal protection? That is my worry, I don't want to fork over money just to have it go up in smoke.

    1. Re:64 bit proc = extreme heat? by scorcherer · · Score: 1

      The number space of a 64-bit processor is 2^32 times as large as that of current 32-bit ones. Therefore it is obvious that it will produce 2^32 = 4 billion times the heat.

      --

      --
      The Cap is nigh. Time to get a fresh new account.

    2. Re:64 bit proc = extreme heat? by Spy · · Score: 2, Informative

      At present a pally (Athlon XP) needs MB support for good thermal protection. We will see what the tbread (.13um Athlon) needs. The hammer was designed from the start as a server chip so really nice thermal protection will most likely be there (rumor has it a heat spreader like the K6's or P4's will be present).

    3. Re:64 bit proc = extreme heat? by HiyaPower · · Score: 2

      Gotta lotta AMD chips around this place, including some as dual in 2u servers. No problem with any of them. Most of them are grinding 100% load at 40->45C. I am afraid that you are a victum of Intel fud.

      Btw, the XP and MP line implements a thermal diode. Your mobo can throttle or shutdown the same way the P4 does if you want, but if you are at all intelligent on your case design, etc. you will never have to do that. Many of the bioses today implement a shutdown temperature driven off the termistor (ECS for one makes mobos that do this).

      I have never seen a fan melt off a heatsink. Can't quite imagine how he managed that one.

    4. Re:64 bit proc = extreme heat? by mikefoley · · Score: 2, Insightful

      This has got to be one of the most UNinformed entries on /. in a LONG time. I wonder if it's an Intel employee being directed by his FUDmaster?

      --
      What's my Karma Mr. Burns? "Excellent"
    5. Re:64 bit proc = extreme heat? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      this should be modded WAY up!

  52. Just Imagine a... by PsiPhi · · Score: 1

    Beowulf cluster of these!!!

    har har har.

    --
    ------
    Remember: The Lord is watching you. Try to be entertaining.
  53. 64 bit apps by brad3378 · · Score: 1

    Soon some open source projects will likely try to take advantage of the 64 bit archetechture. New applications will be needed; Compilers, Databases, etc.

    How will we know the difference between the old applications and the new applications? Many people will need to keep their stable 32 bit apps alongside their new 64 bit apps. For instance, What will we call the replacement for gcc?
    gcc64 ?

    --

    1. Re:64 bit apps by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      are you on glue,

      there have been 64 bit processors for 20 + years.

      gcc has supported 64 bit processors for most of that

      yeeesh. kids these days.

    2. Re:64 bit apps by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


      On IRIX boxes the compilers have options like -32 and -64 to allow you to compile and link whatever sort of application you want.

      I believe gcc has options along the same lines for use on IRIX (type: man gcc).

      IRIX/MIPS already went through this transition. Its not correct to say it went perfectly but it caused my IRIX users very little trouble.

      So, just read old IRIX/MIPS-related newsgroups to get a feel for this.

    3. Re:64 bit apps by PimpNasty · · Score: 1

      I believe the options for gcc is 'gcc -m64'

      --
      - Pimp

      I like computers, women and computers... in that order...
    4. Re:64 bit apps by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      64-bit processors are around already (MIPS, UltraSPARC) and gcc works just fine. (Better than the vendors compilers usually, but that's another story).

      cheers,
      J

  54. Apostrophes do not mean... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...Warning! "S" approaching! Look out!

    Come on... "buy's"? "Alpha's"? ;)

  55. It will be "free" by Wesley+Felter · · Score: 2

    It doesn't matter whether people need it or not. In a few years AMD will be making only 64-bit CPUs, so people will buy them and run them in 32-bit mode.

  56. Desktop applications requiring lots of RAM by mbessey · · Score: 5, Insightful

    A short list of desktop applications that could reasonably use multi-gigabytes of RAM. These are all arguably "high-end" applications, but that goes with the territory:

    1. Non-linear video & film editing:
    Current video editing software can work from and to disk, but availability of more RAM will make it easier to do more sophisticated effects in real time.

    2. Genome sequence analysis
    Okay, not very many people will be doing this, but it IS a growing field, and people are doing the work on desktiop machines now (albeit slowly).

    3. Modelling / CAD
    You can never have too much memory in a CAD workstation.

    4. Software development
    Again, you can never have too much memory. More memory enables more agressive optimization, as well as supporting more productivity features in the IDE (like full source indexing). I have used toolsets that need 2+ GB of RAM to compile a relatively simple program (they swap now, of course).

    So, probably not for Microsoft Word '03, but there are definitely applications for 64-bit computing out there other than servers.

    -Mark

    1. Re:Desktop applications requiring lots of RAM by lanner · · Score: 2, Interesting


      More RAM will not matter if you can not access the data which you desire from the permanent storage device. ATA and SCSI just can not deliver, mostly due to individual disk drive IO. Fiber Channel is close, but not practical, and is no different than something like RAID1 when it comes to performance. It is all stored on disks. That is going to have to change or something. Disks are a mechanical device and are not going to scale. Something is going to have to give. Something new needs to be made to accelerate this IO from the permanent storage into the temporary manipulation space (RAM).

      Right now, I do not want a faster processor, because that will not improve the speed of disk IO. I do not need more RAM, because I really do not use it (today). Faster network speed? That would be nice, but the 11MB across my LAN is okay for now.

      I just wish that moving that data around was faster, not necessarily being able to hold more of it. And in this case of speed, the processor has nothing to do with it.

      Now what this all has to do with this new AMD processor, I do not know. Nothing. Mod me down.

    2. Re:Desktop applications requiring lots of RAM by lanner · · Score: 1


      woops, I meant RAID0, stripping. Not RAID1, mirroring.

      My bad.

    3. Re:Desktop applications requiring lots of RAM by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      OK, obviously you don't need more RAM.
      Physical RAM is not the issue here either. It's the virtual address space.

      Video editing is probably the best example: A full length video film will not fit into 4 GB (DVD quality). 64bit will remove ugly workarounds that have been necessary here. You don't have to actually have 10 GB of memory in your PC...

    4. Re:Desktop applications requiring lots of RAM by Zathrus · · Score: 1

      The magic keyword, as it has been for the past 20 years, is buffering.

      Have deep enough buffers between your CPU registers and your RAM, and between your RAM and your HD, and you seriously reduce the percentage of misses. Assuming you have a good caching strategy and lookahead. This is why an IDE drive can max out ATA/133 even when the physical disk can't transfer data at even half the maximum bandwidth. Sure, that spurt is short (8 MB or less), but the fact remains that it's there.

      Physical disk drives aren't going away anytime soon. Holographic storage remains "10 years out", as it has for the past 15 years. Meanwhile disks have continued to ramp up in both storage space and transfer speed (and the former at a rate that exceeds Moore's law for transistors).

      If you really think that CPU speed has absolutely no effect on system speed, then why is it that things DO run faster with a higher end CPU? Ditto for more RAM. Ditto for a bigger network connection (and for some reason I seriously doubt you have 100 Mbit connection to the net... or that you're able to get 11 MB/s over a 100 Mbit connection either). Despite the bottlenecks you have deeply overemphasized, the CPU and (very importantly) it's data bus continue to be a bottleneck in all PCs and most high end systems (this is one area where HyperTransport will significantly help). The CPU is still responsible for crunching nearly every bit of data that passes over your HD's, the network, and your memory. And it still doesn't do all of that instantly, so bumping up the speed continues to help.

  57. I was there - I'll tell you what happened by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    A curtain unveiled a gleaming new x86-64 machine and the chief engineer of AMD had the machine execute the instruction:

    INC RAX

    Arthur Andreson consulting confirmed the register which had previously contained the value 0x7499fa74b01a64f1 was now correctly set to 0x7499fa74b01a64f2 - and then the crowd simultaneously erupted in applause.

    1. Re:I was there - I'll tell you what happened by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wow - I have no idea what that means.

      Bad uber-geek joke maybe?

  58. BTU != British Heating Units by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    BTU == British Thermal Unit

  59. WHAT!?!? IDIOT MODERATORS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Very off topic, but this just ticks me off.

    So far I have read several statments against Linux and they of course get mod'd down. This guy is the first to make a pun at Windows and gets mod'd UP!

    This whole article screamed "FLAMEWAR" from the begining. So I expected moderators to venture in here with some form of openess or at least with some sense in their head not to encourage this behaviour.

    I really wish there was some form of balance on Slashdot that makes it interesting for both ends of the readers (MS and Linux fans alike) so you wouldn't have to read through bias'd hogwash that has been mod'd up because people think they are part of some little groupy fan club that they should protect their own.

    Well nuts to you guys, I use QNX, which is neither MS nor Linux derived (thats right it was around before Linux was), so there!. La-di-da, I'm the best.

    1. Re:WHAT!?!? IDIOT MODERATORS by Archie+Steel · · Score: 1, Offtopic

      Bah, you're just jealous because you couldn't think of a clever pun first! :-)

      Seriously, man, don't get too excited about this. Lighten up! See? I'm back were I started, at 2 (because Karma>25, I guess), so all's well that ends well...though I am a bit hurt that you didn't think my pun was funny (I sure thought so).

      BTW I use Linux and Windows daily...

      --

      Reminder: find a new sig
    2. Re:WHAT!?!? IDIOT MODERATORS by Tony-A · · Score: 2

      When Windows and Hammer get together.......
      And yes, I thought your pun was funny.

  60. linux, bah by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    In reality, Linux will likely have 64 bit applications more quickly than Microsoft, and will see use on this processor more readily than your average WinTel machine, so you know...like...it only makes sense.
    Perhaps linux will have them quicker, but that does not comment on the desirability of them. The linux kernel still is not enterprice ready, it is bloated and the VM is inefficient. When Microsoft gets their OS on this, it will blow the socks off of linux. The best programmers are paid to code, they don't give it away for free. OSS is the foundation for communism. Vote propritary, vote Microsoft!

    1. Re:linux, bah by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nice troll ... I especially like the "enterprice" pretend typo.

    2. Re:linux, bah by Bert64 · · Score: 1

      Anti-bloat and pro-microsoft, very strange combination.

      --
      http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!
  61. ExtremeTech has more detailed article by writertype · · Score: 1

    Looks like that piece was simply written from a press release. ExtremeTech has a piece at here that talks about the Linux distro used (SuSE) and some of the details of the motherboard.

  62. The HAMMER!#$! by Hydro-X · · Score: 1

    Maybe they should get Jim "The HAMMER" Shapiro to be the official spokesman for this.

    Side note: I'm not sure if that commercial was shown nationally in the US. I used to catch it on Fox Rochester (the Fox affiliate carried by my canadian cable provider) all the time. Anyone who's seen the ads will however understand how Jim would be effective in selling, well, anything really.

  63. Sorry.. just got to me... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Sorry, it wasn't anything personal, it was the straw that broke the Camels back. Ahhhhh well.

  64. Why the hell is the a +5 ?? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Microsoft has IA-64 version of Windows, and I believe it is shipping for Itanium system. So Microsoft has made and is maintaining a 64bit version of Windows.

    Apparently the version of Windows shown was 32bit. There are rumors that Microsoft is working on a 64bit x86-64, but nothing conclusive so far. The demo showing Windows as legacy, and Linux as 64bit is a very clever ploy by AMD to try to pressure Microsoft to step up to the plate or find themselves behind.

    As to upgrades of Windows, because of the native support for both 32bit and 64bit instruction sets in hammer, this will allow Microsoft to make one single version of Windows with support for both, should choose to do so.

  65. Yahmill is a rumor ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yahmill is a rumor as told from an ex-Intel employee. As far as it has been described, it is an AMD-compatible x86-64 implementation. People who have looked at and studied the AMD specification and know Intel's history can guess how Intel would pull this off (if they decide to do so.) They'd start with AMD's spec, then extend it significantly, then convince Microsoft to use this extensions as a tricky artificial way of making it look like AMD is behind.

  66. Pathetic by donglekey · · Score: 2

    How sad it is that by the time MS got their consumer operating system completly out of 16 bit land that 64 bit consumer computers are coming into play. How long will it be before their consumer OS is 64 bit? Another 8 years?

    1. Re:Pathetic by swissmonkey · · Score: 1

      Well, let's say.... now ?

      Win2k 64bit for Alpha was in beta at the same level of functionality than the x86 version when Compaq decided to give up, and actually it runs quite well.

      WinXP 64bit is already out the door.

    2. Re:Pathetic by donglekey · · Score: 1

      I meant consumer, joecool@aol.com desktop, not win2000 or NT which I realize have been in 64 bit versions before.

  67. Does it really matter? by daytrip00 · · Score: 1

    Does everybody really need a 64 bit version of Office and IE? Doubt it...

    The apps w/ the big 64 bit / Improved fp unit benifits aren't MS apps anyway. All we need in 64 bit is quake and the 3d programs.

  68. Just a couple tiny facts... by ajp · · Score: 1

    1. Intel is also touting Linux on the Itanium. See www.intel.com/itanium. Notice that the supported OS's are "Enterprise UNIX, Linux and Windows", yes, in that order. WinTel is dead, long live WinTel.

    2. If Microsoft claimed that they're planning to ship WinXP for AMD, ./ would be screaming about vaporware. AMD not only says it will be there, they previewed it (first line of source article. Does anyone read those?)

    3. Finally, from ExtremeTech's article about the Hammer vs the Itanium: "Intel's IA-64 is a clean break, while AMD's Hammer is philosophically (some would say pathologically) another extension to the ages-old x86 architecture." Do you think AMD is extending x86 to protect all of those Linux apps that people depend upon? I don't think so. They want to make sure people can run AOL version 7.0 on their 64-bit machines.

    4. This is still point three: A bumper sticker I saw in San Jose reads "Intel puts the backwards in backwards compatible." Give them a break. They're trying something new (while hedging their bets with Yamhill.) AMD is giving us the same old, same old.

  69. Honest Question. Isn't the bottleneck still Disks by BadlandZ · · Score: 2, Insightful
    Just wanted to see if anyone could give me some pointers, explination, or URLs to find out.

    As we go over 2GHz, and from 32 to 64 bit, bus speed is going up (good), memory seems to be creeping up on speed (RAM that is)....

    But what about hard drive access speeds? They don't seem to be getting faster at the same rate as everything else. And, the only think I seem to ever be "waiting" for using my 32bit 1Ghz system is reading something from the hard drive.

  70. After all, Bill Gates Himself said... by epukinsk · · Score: 3, Funny

    '640K^H^H^H^H 4 gigs is more memory than anyone will ever need.'

    -Erik

  71. AMD processors heat performance on the field by LeiraHoward · · Score: 1
    I work in information technology on a rather large campus. We use many Athlon/Duron AMD chips, and I have to tell you that we have lost MANY chips and motherboards due to fan failure. When the fan stops, the CPU overheats, causing the computer to lock. The CPU then proceeds to actually fry the motherboard, causing a replacement CPU and motherboard to be necessary.

    One day, we actually had 8 computers in a 40- computer lab down, because all of their fans had failed in the past few days, frying the boards. (Lesson to people in our purchasing dept: don't skimp on the fans!)

    As far as fans melting off the heat sink, I've had that happen to me just once: this past week. I left my room Saturday night to go play euchre. Got back an hour later to find my computer off, and a smell of smoke in the air. Opened the case to find that the part of the fan that screws into the heatsink had melted and the fan had fallen off, ending up on top of my GeForce card.

    I figure that after the fan melted off, the heat sink didn't do much good, the CPU overheated, and the motherboard fried. Another note of interest: the motherboard became so hot that I burned myself touching the edge of it.

    I contacted AMD- they will replace my CPU and fan, due to warranty. They said that this has happened before, though it's rare. Unfortunately, they will not cover the damage they did to my board, and the board manufacturer won't either, as I bought it from a dealer they don't explicitly endorse. The dealer says it is the manufacturer's job to take care of defects, etc, so I am basically going through a bunch of hassle trying to get SOMEONE to cover the damage.

    And if you're interested, the CPU is an XP 1700+ on an ECS K7S5A board.

    All that to say, I know where this guy is coming from. I think it is a valid concern. And apparently AMD knows about this too. They have been working towards getting better, hopefully they will continue to improve. I go with the AMD chips because I like the better price and performance. If they continue to give me this much hassle, though, I'll consider switching to Intel...

  72. x86: PreCursor to Open Source Processor? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The open-source movement -- especially Linux developers -- could help AMD and Intel to streamline their processors. What do I mean? Linux developers are outstanding programmers, and they know that there are certain x86 instructions which either are useless or should be declared useless. The developers could simply agree to avoid using certain instructions. Then, AMD and Intel could both agree to create a variant of the x86 that does not implement those instructions, simplifying and speeding up the architecture. In this way, we could also mold the architecture to support up to 32 64-bit general-purpose registers.

    The open-source community is full of smart professionals who are committed to the art and science of programming. I am sure that we could wittle the x86 instruction set down to a workable subset to which all open-source software would be restricted. Then, AMD and Intel would be faced with a huge application base (i. e. open-source base) that runs only on this subset, so those 2 companies would have the financial incentive to streamline the ugliest architecture in the business.

    As a caveat, both AMD and Intel would agree that other companies are free to clone this subset. In effect, we would have an instruction set architecture created by the open-source community. In other words, an open source processor.

    1. Re:x86: PreCursor to Open Source Processor? by BiggyP · · Score: 1

      well, i think that Intel and AMD could help the opensource community streamline their software rather than the other way around, It is not in the chip makers interest to make modifications to this line of chips that would remove compatibility which snipping away instuctions would do, if you are going to change IA32 enough to make it incompatible you may as well move to a new architecture all together.

  73. Normal users don't need vintage 96 tech by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Dude Read This Are you telling me the state of the art 96/97 system is 'good enough' for anyone? That kinda system can't handle a java applet nowadays, and a flash applet would choke that system to a crawl.

    I'm sorry but 200 MHz is _not_ enough for an average user. Even a modern word processor can load in a fraction of the time on a modern sytem compared to a 25-30 second load time on a 200 MHz.

    Based on the evolution of technology I would have to say that anyone using technology from late 96 is going to be very sad compared to the performance they can get from even the cheapest gigahertz celeron system.

    And those people who mistakenly choose a celeron 1 GHz system today will be crying tears in three years as .net applications slow them to a crawl. meanwhile people with 1700+ Athlon XP processors aren't going to run into serious issues until well into 2007 for memory and resource hungry internet based applications.

    True, using an athlon until 2007 is going to leave you in the dust for many many years, but there will be few applications except in the gaming and professional markets that require better systems much before 2007.

    Normal users are generally happy with the computers they're running until they hit that road block where something they want to do can't be done. In that sense I'm sure there are many happy ignorant P-200 users out there. There are also some happy relatively bright people who've never seen a reason to leave a Command line interface who are more than happy with a 200 MHz cpu. However the command line is not enough of an interface for everyone especially normal people. For those people the gigahertz CPU will be fine for years on end, but eventually progress will march on and that gigahertz cpu will end up leaching heavy metals into a river in china.

    Someday the technology will stop getting faster every 18 months. When that happens, then a computer can be bought as a 30 year appliance that people run until it breaks down. There is another dynamic that this will cause. Microsoft's business model is more driven by new technology than intel's is. If hardware stops advancing intel could lay off all but a skeleton crew of developers there to fix glitches or bugs. As long as microsoft's model is based on making people buy a new OS every year then they need an awful lot of R&D. If people only buy a computer every 30 years and never change the OS where does that leave microsoft? They still have to develop and refine the product to fix bugs. It's proven that supporting an old OS becomes too expensive to continue supporting it 6 years after developing it. So where does this leave Microsoft? Up shit creek without a paddle. If people come to expect 30 years of software support instead of 3 well there is nothing that microsoft can do to remain a viable company except plead the government for funding.
    Welcome to the amtrack of the 22nd century.
    Microsoft is on the same track as the railroads, assuming linux doesn't overwhelm them. The last great leap in computer technology is the last nail in the coffin that microsoft has made for itself.
    And people wonder why microsoft wants to convert windows into a time restricted product that will stop booting when you stop paying. They've seen the light at the end of the tunnel and they're deperate to make that tunnel longer by hook or by crook.

  74. Umm not to defray what /. thinks the issue is by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I know this will change the Windows bashing subject matter that all you /.'ers love, but well, umm...

    Did anybody notice that half you so called "geeks" don't seem to realise that the x86-64 platform from AMD is a Hybrid, capable of running 32 bit x86 code just fine.

    I mention this because several posts seem to be ignorant of this fact, even stating contrary beliefs.

  75. Re:Honest Question. Isn't the bottleneck still Dis by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Two words: SERIAL ATA.

    (coming soon to a computer near you!)

  76. Anandtech article with pictures! by pointwood · · Score: 4, Informative

    Anandtech has posted an article with lots of information and pictures Right here.

  77. x86-64 support probable by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The .NET dev stuff has #ifdefs for x86-64.

    1. Re:x86-64 support probable by Namarrgon · · Score: 2

      Interesting. Doesn't really show Win64 support, but at least they've heard of AMD ;-)

      --
      Why would anyone engrave "Elbereth"?
  78. 64-bit for the consumer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No typical American consumer should really be buying these because they're 64-bit, but rather because they're supposed to be faster than the Athlon and use HyperTransport(tm) technology for a wickedly fast memory bus. The 64-bit is only useful for massive servers or for number crunching and scientific applications for those who can't afford a Cray.

  79. Answer: .18 vs .13 techonology by Kjella · · Score: 2

    .18^2 / .13^2 = 1.91 means that AMD are producing chips at approximately double cost compared to .13 technology, which Intel is now using in their Northwood P4s. Expect AMD to be just holding the ground they've gained until they can make their own transition, it just doesn't make business sense to start the price war now.

    Kjella

    --
    Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
  80. You completely missed the point by megalomang · · Score: 1

    What I could discern from your message is that you are confusing Hammer with a desktop PC processor. You probably didn't understand my original post, so I'll elaborate.

    In order for AMD to compete to any extent with IA64, AMD is targetting Hammer to the workstation and server market. Very few people are going to "upgrade for the speed benefits". Even though it's AMD, the price will be way too high for the home PC market. AMD is looking to increase its margins by entering the workstation and server market with Hammer, so it would defeat their purpose to target the home PC market with this platform.

    With that in mind, I would offer that M$ is desparately trying to displace Unix in heavy computing environments and even moreso displace Linux and Apache in the server space. To do this, they need to attack Linux on all fronts. And if you recognize that AMD will consume more than a negligible portion of the marketplace (which is definitely arguable at this point since nobody can predict what will turn out) and you assume that M$ will not yield any of their marketshare to Linux, then you could conclude that AMDs active support of Linux forces M$ to support win64 on the Hammer platform.

  81. Whats with the dinky heatsink? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is an AMD processor! I cannot have a computer that has a small rinky-dink heatsink like that - I will I heat the house? Okay, so it was only a 1GHz piece, and it is 0.13u SOI (see, AMD have got it working, naysayers). -- Recovering from IBM Hard Drive Failure (75GXP). Worst Hard Drive Ever.

  82. More Stories about the Hammer (and pictures) by subgeek · · Score: 1

    saw some more stories on this subject.

    Tom's Hardware has a story about there visit to AMD and the demo they got. They even got to take pictures, but unfortunately were not allowed to reboot to view BIOS messages.

    The Register has an article that covers the same basic turf as the c|net article mentioned at the top. maybe slightly more in depth.

    and of course, everyone around here seems to love to loathe ZDnet these days.

    in the pictures at tom's it looks like this thing has a pretty honkin' heat sink. i wonder how much the silicon-on-insulator process used to make these things reduces heat and power consumption.

    The thought of what these beauties could do just makes me feel all warm inside. i hope they live up to my expectations.

    --
    you probably shouldn't have read this.
  83. Listen to what you're saying... by mbessey · · Score: 2
    More RAM will not matter if you can not access the data which you desire from the permanent storage device.
    ...
    It is all stored on disks. That is going to have to change or something. Disks are a mechanical device and are not going to scale.

    And if you had 10GB of RAM, how often would you have to read or write something to disk? Almost never. Your "permanent storage" just becomes a back-up in case power fails, and the whole thing just runs from RAM. Disks are never going to be nearly as fast as RAM (they're each optimized in different directions). The best way to improve I/O performance in a computer system is simply to not do any I/O

    -Mark

  84. You got the lesser story by Loki_1929 · · Score: 1

    The fact that they showed them off with Linux isn't nearly as entertaining as the fact that they were showing them off just a few blocks from the Intel Developer Forum.

    AMD: Hey Intel..
    Intel: Yes?
    AMD: EAT ME!

    :)

    --
    -- "Government is the great fiction through which everybody endeavors to live at the expense of everybody else."
  85. IA-64 isn't modern... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's post-modern.

  86. What programmers want has nothing to do with it by HanzoSan · · Score: 2


    Programmers dont want bloated code, users of the program want big powerful apps. Thats why we have photoshops and netscapes and the like.

    With media based apps and media editing, and file sharing its just going to keep raising the bar.

    As far as ram, ram speed and harddrive speed are two off the main bottlenecks of a PC, raise the speed of ram, and the speed of the harddrive, have about 16 megs of L2 cache, you'll have a fast computer if the ram is feeding data to the cpu at about 6gigs per second, the CPU displays to the screen instantly, everything would be instantanious, bloated code or not, programs the size of windows will load instantly hell your machine will boot instantly, add a 64bit cpu and you'll be able to edit huge files, add scsi raid and you'll have the transfer rates needed to handle it, and for file sharing on your fibre optic line downloadinng hundreds of gigs a week, your 10 terrabyte drive wont last very long.

    Sure this PC may be a few years away, but this PC will be the average PC of a power user within 3 years.

    --
    If you use Linux, please help development of Autopac