Slashdot Mirror
Athlon 64 Debuts
SpinnerBait writes "AMD launches their Athlon 64 and Athlon 64 FX chips today and there is
a full analysis with benchmarks up at HotHardware. Interestingly
enough, Intel pulled a fast one (literally) and released a new breed of Pentium
4 chips with 2MB of on board L3 cache, just in time to boost their performance
in the benchmarks for this launch. Regardless, the performance levels for
AMD's new flagship look very strong." Tom's has a story, or Tech Report, or see info straight from AMD.
And Anandtech has a good article up, as well.
$8.95/mo web hosting
So Intel cheated by, uh, making better hardware?
...how does it benchmark against the Commodore 64???
when will we see some serious APPS that utilize this technology?? why would joe user go buy one? to check their mail?
although not intended to be a troll, its looking that way....
if the OS, AND the Apps run 64bit - i'll buy one...till then, i'll stick with my original thunderbird, 1.4ghz.
We're like rats, in some experiment! -- George Costanza
I'll wait until they actually come out with applications that use the 64-bit extensions to the x86 instruction set. Doesn't seem like its worth it to pay big bucks and buy this for 32-bit applications
P4 EE 3.2ghz ~ $750
Athlon 64 3200+ (2.0ghz) ~$500
Athlon FX 51 (2.2ghz) ~ $700-800
And how much are 512Mb ECC chips ?
Begun these processor wars have!
"Comedy's a dead art form. Now tragedy, that's funny."
Though I am a die hard AMD supporter, i have to admit Intel has really pulled one up on AMD this time. The 64bit 3200+ is just about 15-20% faster than the stock and barrel Intel 32bit 3.2 GHz. Bad news for AMD this is, considering the retail price of these babies is 450 & 800$ (Normal and FX).
And BTW windows released XP 64bit Beta1 today.My Aurora : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o91ZsGwJYyg
FB : https://www.facebook.com/TanveersPhotography
The first 64-bit PC processor, in a class by itself,...
Did someone forget to remind their marketing department that PC means "Personal Computer" and not necessarily x86?
Here are some more benchmarks
AMDzone
AnandTech
XbitLabs
Ace Hardware
There are even more at AMDZones main page.
How long till Linix has a dedicated 64 bit dedicated system?
Microsoft 64 2008?
--"Sorry for the inconvience." Gods Last Words to his Creation
DNA, So Long and Thanks for all the Fish
First, we still don't have a mass market consumer OS for native x86-64, and even when Windows XP for x86-64 does come out (the word from the betas is that it's very very good and solid), we still need to wait for x86-64 compatible drivers to be developed and released by the various manufacturers, and it would be no small feat to even have a small core sampling of drivers available by say, summer 2004. Personally, I'm hoping that Nforce3 and ATI Catalyst drivers will be ready very early on.
Mad props to AMD, but they're not out of the woods yet on this release.
Finally, a 64-bit desktop processor!
Oh wait it's been done!
But seriously, there are a number of reasons why this is a great chip.
Namely, if Intel actually thinks putting a cache that's too big on a chip is actually going to help, good luck.
A Toast to AMD for once again making the superior product.
A site with the name "HOT" Hardware had to review an AMD chip. Why not just post a Slashdot article asking for AMD overheating jokes? Open the floodgates!
HardOCP
Tom's hardware
Ace's Hardware
As you would expect, no chip is dominate. though the more interesting thing for me than the nip and tuck between $800 CPUs, is the Athlon64 3200+ performs right there with the 3.2C in mosts lets. Not bad considering it retails for more than $100 less.
Remember, it will be a while before hardware is supported properly on it. Somebody on OSnews.com has reported problems installing linux on his Opteron (Server version of A64) machine.
I wish I had mod points so I could mod this one down. God, the whole "welcome our new xxxxx overlords" is getting so old. Try something original please.
Now all we need is someone to get this running in a C64 :)
1) Application Programming
2) Ssytems Programming
3) General Purpose and System Instructions
4) 128-Bit Media Instructions
5) 64-Bit Media and x87 Floating-Point Instructions
Get them here.
Then go make your favorite compiler or windowing system work better on this.
See what I've been reading.
I'm just curious because I see a lot of other people asking about a supporting OS - what about a supporting MOBO (motherboard), particularly for the AMD chip? I don't even know the name of one. Have they even created one yet?
Linux 32 bit on the P4, 32 bit on the AMD and 64 bit on the AMD. Throw in 64 bit Linux on the P970 and G4.
;o)
It would be nice to see something that could be well controlled (all non-proc specific compile flags equal) to do the testing.
Besides, no one runs this Windows XP rubbish right, where can I see an article testing real systems?
Beep beep.
Probably 6 months before we can optimize this chip. Shall we count the days?
And it rendered on, until the end of its days.
We saw Athlon XP get released when Windows XP was still "hot" and aggressively marketed by Microsoft.
We now see Athlon FX get released when the GeForce FX graphics card series is the state-of-the-art among hardcore gamers, along with ATI's Radeon series. Hardcore gamers are also coincidentally a target group for AMD's processors since they're known to look for the latest and greatest processor-wise.
I wonder if this is just coincidental, or if AMD is actually using the popularity of other brands to market their own? Are they even using dirty tacticts to try to fool people into thinking "Ooh, this Athlon XP should work especially well together with this newly released Windows XP then, right?" and "Oooh, great, I must have the Athlon FX for my latest video card!"
But perhaps they just happen to choose the same abbreviation as other popular brands at the time for the second time in a row. However, I still can't say AMD's Athlon marketing smell good to me at least.
Beware: In C++, your friends can see your privates!
We would have liked to have tested the Athlon 64 FX-51 with an ATi based video card, but we wanted to use the same hardware with both the 32-bit and 64-bit versions of Windows
nVidia may be well known for their momboard chipsets, but they make shitty graphics cards.
There's a limitied supply, but they're available. Here's one: Athlon64 3200+ bundled with a MSI K8T Neo-FIS2R, in stock and available, for "only" 6600SEK (~$835 /w tax)
I'm salivating, but the limited supply is going to keep the price way, way up for a time.
Belief is the currency of delusion.
Anyone remember having their processor overheat and melt through their mobo? I wonder eventually when we'll have to have a cooling unit as big as a power supply. Honestly though if AMD can bring the production price down then why not look at it as an alternative. I think to myself though, how much longer before they surpass this? And as said previously, who cares when all you're doing is checking your email?
In Soviet Russia, Natalie Portman imagines a beowulf cluster of grits welcoming our new profit overlords, you insensitive clod!
"Give away the stone, let the oceans take and transmutate this cold and faded anchor." - Maynard James Keenan
I would hope that Tom's Hardware would at least try to keep the anti-Mac bias down to a tolerable level.
"At the same time, Apple laid claim that with the G5 model, it would offer the world's most powerful desktop system. Apparently there are users who will believe these kinds of claims. Whatever - at least the G5 also has 64-bit support with regard to the software. Nevertheless, there is still no final operating system available for it."
FUD, lack of evidence, and outright lies - they call this journalism? They dismiss the Apple's claims about the G5's performance without a) including it in their later benchmark or b) citing any references. Why am I suppose to believe someone who is trying to put down a group of users like they are petulent 2 year olds. Also, what is the crack about not having a "final operating system" out yet? 10.2.7 is a fine OS for the G5. If he means that there is no 64-bit OS, why not just come out and say it?
Pfff. I can't believe I took time away from constantly reloading my Fedex tracking page to read that drivel.
PS - FEDEX, BRING ME MY DAMN G5 ALREADY!!
I will probably buy one when the prices come down. For now I will stick to my Athlon XP 2000+ which except for running OpenOffice runs quite well.
A physical address space that can support systems with up to one terabyte of installed RAM, shattering the 4 gigabyte RAM barrier present on all current x86 implementations.
If you implement x86 with PAE then you get 8gb.
It's only 4gb if you exclude dirty hacks - but if you did that then you would have to rule out x86 in it's entirety.
Beep beep.
haha, now that's kind funny :)
Where does, "you insensitive clod" come from anyway, I always see people suggesting it as a new poll choice, but I can't remember once when it was actually a poll choice.
A benchmark of Linux on the following systems:
GCC Settings for each system should be optimized for the best possible stable performance. I'm so sick of seeing 32 bit windows benchmarks for testing 64bit processors.
That's the whole point, if you don't include a poll option that reflects the person's own choice, you are an insensitive clod!
"Give away the stone, let the oceans take and transmutate this cold and faded anchor." - Maynard James Keenan
AMD is making Intel eat dust w this launch
Ok, the P4 EE beats if they are OVERCLOCKED... And this intel launch was plain stupid. I mean, 700 for a processor? I can buy me another couple of machines and build me a bewolf cluster...
And AMD will really show its power when having 64bit benchmarks
Xeon PAE? No thanks?
64bit math in P4EE? Do you mean it?
how long until
Don't forget that benchmarks will increase ~10% in general purpose applications when compiled for 64 bit mode (due to more registers). Highly optimized kernels such as video and audio codecs could increase even more. Also, Linux distributions will be compiled for x86-64 which will give greater performance than the generic "686" optimization used today.
You can get Windows 2003 Server and Windows XP 64bit 2003 Edition from the MSDN Website (assuming you have an account).
Although the numbers look impressive, I personally would wait till their are more 64 bit applications in the market. If you are a gamer there would be modest increases in performance but really waiting a few more months will not hurt if you are more interested in value.
I love the fact that AMD is competing, this bodes well for all computer users. A technology war will definitely keep prices down. In the same sense, I am hoping that Intel comes out with a "decent" 64 bit chip. Not that I am fond of Intel, I prefer AMD but still the fact remains that whenever their is conflict we see the most marked increases in technology.
I think AMD should now sue APPLE ...
"The worlds first 64bit desktop computer."
actually no ... i consider SUN ultra's to be desktops. and AMD64 has been launched first.
"THe worlds fastest, most powerful personnal computer"
ill wait for independant benchmarks.
maybe i just made a clwon out of myself. is the g5 on sale already?
Cowabunga, dude!
Tom's hardware has got another article, called The Intel v. AMD Performance War: You Lose , about the more cynical, money-making sides of the launch. Perhaps it's a bit conspiratory, but certainly worth a read, as it raises many valid points.
this is kinda a letdown. everyone hoped this thing would kick butt and it barely compares to a lot of stuff. their own old CPU model beats it in some tests... kinda reminds me of the early p4's being outrun by some of the older p3's... im a diehard AMD fan but im starting to worry for AMD.
...of both the new AMD-64 and the Pentium 4 Extreme is that the prices of the older chips should start dropping like a stone.
Learning HOW to think is more important than learning WHAT to think.
AMD created the 3DNow! extensions to the 80x86 instruction set architecture (ISA), also known as IA-32. They were a significant improvement over the original set of MMX extensions. However, later, Intel created the SSE (and SSE2) extensions. Guess what? AMD was forced to incorporate them into its future chips in addition to the 3DNow! extensions. Ignoring the SSE extensions would have cost AMD dearly in terms of marketshare. The fact of the matter is that Intel sets the global standard for the IA-32 ISA.
Now, AMD has created its own x86-64 extensions to the IA-32. You can be sure that Intel has created a different set of 64-bit extensions (which we shall call "INTEL-64") to the IA-32. After all, why would Intel support AMD in any way? Once Intel activates the INTEL-64 extensions in the upcoming Prescott, AMD will be forced to go back to the drawing board to incorporate the INTEL-64 into all future chips. The current Athlon64 will be like the K-5 -- interesting but without a future.
AMD will probably take an additional 2 years to produce an INTEL-64-compatiable chip. By that time, Intel would have locked 90% of the 64-bit desktop market with Prescott.
The worst news is for Sun. With Prescott, Intel has a 64 bit chip that will be significantly faster than the UltraSPARC III/IV. Right now, the Pentium 4 crushes the UltraSPARC III in performance. Please review the performance characteristics of the Pentium 4 at the SPEC web site. Since Prescott (successor to the Pentium 4) will be faster than its predecessor, Prescott will clean UltraSPARC's clock. Moreover, the number of applications that will run on Prescott -- the heir to the software empire of the x86 -- far exceeds the number of applications that run on UltraSPARC III/IV. On the key TPC-C benchmark, Prescott will clearly deliver outstanding performance, compared to the UltraSPARC III/IV.
In short, when Intel activates the INTEL-64 extensions in Prescott, Intel will force (1) AMD back to its usual state of borderline bankruptcy and (2) Sun into being a software company.
It will be really great if someone (Sun, Blackdown, anyone?) would finally release a native JDK for any of these AMD chips. The official story is that Sun will have official support in Java 1.5, but that is not until next summer. Maybe we could have something sooner from Blackdown?
This is a major issue, because the Opteron chips are going to be used mainly in servers, and lots of server apps are now written in Java.
Well, I didn't know Tomshardware was a part of AMD...
Hello? Another dumb post.
Who is making the motherboards for an Athlon64? Visit Pricewatch.com Look in the Athlon64 motherboard category.
http://www.pricewatch.com/1/2/5743-1.htm
ASUS, MSI, Gigabyte, etc
Did you see the performace gain by the cache you say is too big (Normal 512K P4 versus Extreme 2MB P4)?
The cache is the main reason the G5 Dual 2.0 isn't that much better than a G4 Dual 1.42. If the G5 had 2MB Cache as the G4's do it would perform even better (L2 would be significantly better than L3 as well, but costs increase significantly).
Next time you're trying to run some 3D modeling or any other intensive CPU based software, just realize the cache is significant.
I think we can all see the wisdom of releasing the new processor before the new OS.
-Looking for a job as a materials chemist or multivariat
I, for one, welcome our 'the whole overlord's thing is getting so old' overlords.
Midway through the article we see this. What's this, chopped liver?
"Not yet available: software for 64 bits
Although AMD has published a list with many details on the Athlon-64 support, there are few software publishers who plan over the medium term to offer applications for true 64-bit operation.
In video the Divx encoder for MPEG-4 will be available shortly in a final version for 64-bit. Game producers in general are also hesitant: although according to AMD, producers like Epic, Valve, Crytek and SCI offer games based on 64-bit code. Companies such as ID Software, who are responsible for titles like Quake3 and Unreal Tournament 2003, are not ready to jump onto the 64-bit bandwagon.
In what timeframe Microsoft will be able to bundle its final version of Windows XP 64 with systems is currently unknown. However, we can assume that an operating system will be ready before summer 2004. The pre-alpha version of Windows XP 64 that we use came with only a few drivers integrated."
My Beowulf cluster of abacuses will surely outperform them all!
Looking for a Linux/Windows/Mac admin/support tech monkey in the Los Angeles area? Please see my resume.
The Expense will be as much at Intel's lucrative server business as it will be AMD's.
Help fight continental drift.
How much were the manuals?
Athlon 64 can run 99 percent of Commodore 64 software in emulation, including the C=64 version of the Contiki OS. In addition, it can probably run almost all these other ports.
You want native? If the Athlon 64 processor and chipset can boot up as a normal x86, it can run Contiki for PC DOS.
Will I retire or break 10K?
I've already posted a link. It's here.
"I lager" means "In stock".
So what you're going to cry about now? Wrong country? Wrong motherboard bundled (you do need one, after all)
It is already available at newegg.
here
Make A64 -f Makefile
Light a fire under that MoBo...
Got Code?
I just upgraded to an Athlon XP 2600+, and with this announcement surely the XP line is going to see a major price cut soon..
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
The more tangible benefit to running a 64-bit operating system and applications, is the code efficiency associated with it. 64-bit processors, executing 64-bit code, compiled with a 64-bit compiler, should perform marginally faster than similar 32-bit; probably in the neighborhood of 5 - 15% or more, depending on the type of application.
Um...NO. If its a true 64-bit processor, OS, and Application...you'll see FAR more than a 5-15% increase. You'll see an exponential increase. No, not just 100%...true 64 bit everything is more than twice as fast as true 32 bit.
32 bit = 4294967296 possibilities.
64 bit = 18446744073709551616 possibilities.
at home, try your calculator. 2^32, vrs 2^64. I don't want to bother going over the implications here...those that know them, do... ;)
How did you find that?
It'll save me a lot of time though, and duct tape is kinda hard to get hold of here, after it was classified as paraphernalia.
On a related note, don't you think it's strange that we now have computers that have as many bits as the Commodore 64 had memory?
How small a thought it takes to fill a whole life
the first reference to it i saw was in a calvin and hobbes strip. it may have been a reference to yet something else.
slashdot: where everyone yells sarcastic metaphors to themselves to understand the issue
I'm thinking, get rid of the central gas fired heater I have, and just build a couple cheap AMD 64 boxes and leave the case open. Lord knows AMDs burn hot enough!
Come now, think of the possibilities, you could have a hell of a gaming system that doubles as a food dehydrator, or a rotisserie oven or a (insert funny warm gaget here) . . .
They state on one of the early pages:
Many applications improve performance due to the removal of the 32-bit limitations.
Nice try HotHardware.com. Anybody who is anybody knows that performance does not increase just by increasing register bit size!
here
it looks pretty interesting and it's pretty reasonably for what it is at $1650 including a dvd burner;
AMD Athlon(TM) 64 3200+ PC Processor
3 IEEE 1394 Firewire Ports
512 MB DDR 333 main memory (2 GB Max)
10/100 NIC Port
160 GB Ultra ATA/100 Hard Drive
128 MB 8X AGP ATI Radeon 900 SE Video Card
17" Monitor (1280 x 1024 Res.)
1-Year Limited 24Hr/365 Day Tech Support click here to upgrade the monitor
30-Day Money-Back Guarantee Details
56K Max v.92 Send/Receive Fax Modem
DVD-RW with Ulead VideoStudio 6
DVD Bonus Software: DVD X Copy Xpress
Microsoft Windows XP Home Edition
4 USB 2.0 Ports
Creationists are a lot like zombies. Slow, but powerful and numerous. And they all want to eat our brains.
I would take your post seriously if you had mentioned what part you believed Microsoft would play in the world of competing 64-bit extensions.
WXP for the Althon 64 is well on its way, as seen in the linked HotHardware review. Will Microsoft and the driver writing departments at hardware firms put up with a stealth announcement of another set of 64-bit extensions?
If you actually want the industry (and 64-bit computing as a whole) to move forward -- then go out and buy a chip...if nobody buys these because no OS/Software manufacturer writes 64-bit code, then there will be big trouble for little AMD. The idea was to build a chip that runs 32 and 64 bit code very quickly. What it sounds like you're saying is that you're waiting for Intel to release a 64-bit chip so that everyone optimizes their code for that. I, for one would rather back the company who was innovative and was first to market with a pretty cool product than the biggest guy on the block (er...industry...whatever).
From the benchmarks I've seen -- it does a pretty damn good job at both 32 and 64 bit code (especially for a first release without a good 64-bit clean codebase). It manages to beat the existing 3.2 Ghz P4 for cheaper.
I hear what you're saying about waiting on at least one level though -- I can't remember ever spending $400 on a CPU, but I'm confident that in 6 months, those things will be selling for quite a bit less than they are now...they'll be a good bargain.
Finally, I have a 1.4Ghz Thunderbird as my primary desktop. At this point, it should be called a 1.4Ghz Shitbird. I intend to replace it -- the only questions are: when, and replace with what? I know that if I decide to get an Athlon64-ish chip, I won't be making that decision based on whether or not there are 64-bit apps/OS'es for it. For what you pay, it works great...I'll make my decision based on price:performance ratio on what's available now...and from what I can see, it already shines against a much more mature platform.
-Turkey
And when you want to rip your CD collection to mp3 (or ogg, or whatever), you're gonna want the fastest thing around, if you've got a decent collection.
Last time I checked, ripping Compact Disc Digital Audio to .ogg was I/O bound, where the speed of reading PCM audio from the CD limited the whole process. Without some sort of massively multibeam pickup technology, it won't get much faster because CD-ROM drive makers have already run up against the maximum speed at which a CD can rotate without shattering, which is why CD-ROM drives significantly faster than 48x peak haven't become popular. Careless handling of CDs in homes with kids, as well as CD crippling mechanisms, have forced CD audio extraction program authors to use compensations such as rereading sectors. But even if CD audio extraction throughput were to scale up with CPU power, another possible limiting factor is the human interaction factor of taking each CD out of the tray and putting in another one.
Yes, DVD transcoding uses a lot of CPU power, but nobody does that in the USA, right?
Will I retire or break 10K?
wtf? enjoy the adware.
Just thought I'd point out that pretty much all the benchmarks out there are using applications running in 32 bit mode. So before people start saying things like "It's not much faster than a Pentium 4 3.2GHz", when native 64bit mode apps/games start appearing (probably next year), the Athlon 64 will see an additional performace increase.
Considering the terrible performace the Itanium had running existing 32bit code, kudos to AMD for producing an architecture that will provide a gradual transition to 64 bit code.
" To steal ideas from one person is plagiarism; to steal from many is research. "
I watched the live webcast and they said that the intial wave of adopters would be able to register their processor and receive free games.
The microsoft rep also said that there is a site where folks can download the WinXP 64bit BETA.
Where are these things? If I could download WinXP64 (Even in BETA) and get free 64-bit games, I'd be willing to give it a whirl since I need an excuse to upgrade my PC anyway.
[move
ALL your MOD POINT are BELONG to NEW OVERLORD!!!
Add -m64 to you march flags then emerge -e world
The practical algorithm for color correction is patented in several jurisdictions, and the patent holders refuse to license the patents royalty-free. Gentoo can't emerge an app unless the app can be redistributed royalty-free. Do you claim that any application containing a patented algorithm is not a "serious APP"?
Will I retire or break 10K?
I read several of the reviews, and all stuck with 32 bit code for the comparition between the Intel P4 and the AMD Athalon 64. Linux runs on the Atahlon in 64 bit mode, wouldn't be hard to compile PovRay and Doom on a 64 bit compiler and see if anything changes. Thats just for an easy test.
Many real world (science?) applications benifit from 64 bit processors, find some (presumably running on UltraSparc, PPC, Alpha, or such) and port them over to see how the 64bit abilities of this chip compares to the other existing chips.
I run open source OSes, and open Source applications. I don't care about 32 bit performance because I'm fairly sure that if I did have an Athalon 64 I wouldn't run 32 bit code very often. I can choose between many chips, compatable instruction sets to me means gcc (or other compiler) has an output for them. 32 bit x86 compatiabily is nice for the few times I have to run something 32 bit (normally in Wine) and that doesn't happen very often.
This chip uses the Intel instructions for it's 64 bits. I have heard over and over that this instruction set is extremely poor and inefficient. The amount of transistors on these chips is amazing. So my question is would this chip be alot faster if they weren't trying to stay compatible with Intel instructions set ?
The poster of this troll included a link to AMD's website. According to AMD, they have no competition!? What about Sparc and Apple and all of the reviews showing Intel EE beating the majority of their benchmarks? Oh, and AMD's website says they have the largest cache...uh, not true. AMD is grasping for straws here.
r ma tion/0,,30_118_9485_9488%5E9494,00.html
http://www.amd.com/us-en/Processors/ProductInfo
There is a nice summary of reviews at nvnews.net
Get my e-mail after a captcha test in: http://tinymailt
Would Microsoft dare to return to the PowerPC and try to license Windows OS to Mac owners?
Will I retire or break 10K?
Um, maybe you don't realize that the whole "overlord" bit is from the Simpsons? This is slashdot, and maybe you are new here, so here's a tip:
1) Always cool to slam Microsoft
2) Simpson references are always good
If Microsoft is now cool, and Simpsons jokes are no longer welcome, I must be living in Soviet Russia...
pot.kettle(black);
the whole 'PCs are cheaper than Macs' theory is gonna get a lot less credence.
There are low-end Macs, mid-range Macs, and high-end Macs. There are low-end Winboxes, mid-range Winboxes, and high-end Winboxes. However, there are sub-low-end Winboxes such as eMashit and Microtel PCs, but Apple makes no sub-low-end Macs.
Will I retire or break 10K?
i consider SUN ultra's to be desktops.
Are they common in single-family homes in the United States? If not, the mainstream American press won't call them "desktops."
Will I retire or break 10K?
Athlon 64 is copper, and Athlon 64 FX is fiber optic?
--
"Outlook not so good." That magic 8-ball knows everything! I'll ask about Exchange Server next.
I ran across this article today... apparently someone is already trying to put together a mobile system around AMD's new 64-bit offering.
OMFG, I can't believe it! I guess non-execution happens all at the same time. Remember when Intel just couldn't seem to do anything right two years ago? Welcome to Hell Nvidia.
The Nforce3 is horribly flawed. No SATA because they couldn't get the bugs out. At least a 33% dip in AGP performance. WTF?
Between this and the GeForce FX debacle someone needs to be SOOoooo fired!
"...Well, there's egg and bacon; egg sausage and bacon; egg and spam; egg bacon and spam; egg bacon sausage and spam..."
Well that explains why I saw an Athlon64 infomercial last night. I thought they had already been introduced and I missed them. Should I be a little wary of AMD if they're using infomercials?
In Soviet Russia, the dot slashes you!!
Finally can upgrade from DOS 5.0 to DOS 6.0!!
If Intel begins pushing two 64-bit architectures, HP is going to look pretty stupid porting HP-UX, OpenVMS and Windows to the Superdome Itanium.
If Intel pushes the Pentium to 64 bits, HP's enterprise systems are finished. SGI's Altix effort will also be dealt a death blow.
Carly Fiorina was supposedly present at the Opteron launch for closed door meetings with AMD executives. It is a shame that she did not take the opportunity to announce AMD64 ports of the above DEC/HP OSes.
While I grant that Macintoshes, Amigas, Ataris, Commodore 64's & 128's and VIC-20's et al are personal computers, they are not Personal Computers. If you didn't understand that sentence, reread it, paying careful attention to capitalization. IBM produced a product called a Personal Computer, abbreviated PC. Others cloned it. These are PC's, even though competing architectures may also be pc's. A 64-bit pc, such as a high-end Mac, is not a 64-bit PC by virtue of not being a PC, but a pc.
Got it?
www.wavefront-av.com
No, I'm New Here
My friend Boris informed me that Costco is selling one of these.
64 bits words have an advantage I would not have realized before programming compilers for dynamically-typed languages:
In a DT language , you need some way to 'mark' information to say wether it is a number, a pointer, etc. The usual technique is to mark the bit field with a 1 or 2 bit tag at the end.
Also, for garbage collection (ie Mark-And-Sweep) you need to be able to 'mark' the object that needs to stay alive so they are not reclaimed by the gc.
That being said, taking 2 or 3 bits on a 32 bit field is a lot, but it is very interesting to realize that that cost go away on a 64 bit machine.
So, 64 bits = more memory (larger address space) but it also means some techniques becomes much more viable in terms of feasability of implementation, which is a very exciting (for some loose definition of exciting) prospect!
A message from the system administrator: 'I've upped my priority. Now up yours.'
I don't see that claimed anything about patented algorithms not making for serious apps. Of course emerge -e world won't give you /every/ serious app that can ever be written for a 64-bit platform, but it will automagically 64-bit-optimize (for certain values of 'optimize') a fairly large number of existing apps, some of which are certainly serious. (Like PostgreSQL, Apache, OpenOffice, XFree86, GIMP, etc - and don't forget the ability of Linux itself to run either Ath64-native or in x86 code).
YOW! I feel VIRUS-RESISTANT!
Like so many other Slashdot fads, I first heard it on Simpsons.
Did anybody else notice this in the article?
"With Windows XP 64-bit Edition, the new memory limit is 16 terabytes, or 16,000MB (264 = 18,446,744,073,709,551,161) and all of that RAM will be available to the OS and applications."
I assume that is a typo, otherwise I've had a terabyte of RAM, and 80 terabytes of disk storage, for the past year...
SuPz.orG
Cool, just installed this! Doom looks sooo cool!
If you'll read a post up higher on the page, the WinXP 64-bit is on the MSDN site...
Actio personalis moritur cum persona. (Dead men don't sue)
I, for one, welcome our new AMD Overlords and their eternal war against the vile Intels!
I think I'll just stick with my PII. Works fine for me. Thanks anyways AMD.
Not until the software that people use make it necessary for them to purchase said processors. Significant price drops on the lower end CPU's would only be appropriate if demand for those processors significantly declined, with a corresponding increase in demand of the Athlon 64 and P4EE. The Athlon 64 and P4EE will always be more expensive than their weaker models of course, and without the need of consumers to upgrade (at this time), there will be little shift in focus to these new processors.
And with consumer interest remaining with those lower end CPU's, so shall the prices.
with a dumb terminal plugged into a mailserver.
One needs a 64-bit machine so that Windows worms can properly address all of themselves. It's being wasted on the server end.
You can't judge a book by the way it wears its hair.
I wonder if or how Apple Computer, Inc. will modify its marketing efforts. Will it continue to ignore AMD like they did with G4 ads, neglecting the fact that the "megahertz myth" had existed for years in the PC world in the competition between the Athlon and Pentium processors? Which led to numerous Mac users enlightening us lowly PC peons about how processor clock alone does not determine processor performance, a fact which many of us had been aware of long before the release of the Motorola G4.
It is true that the G5 was the first 64bit desktop computer processor. Now there is a second. Apple should show some G5 vs. Athlon 64 benchmarks, which should be a much more competitive comparison price-performance wise than one dealing with G5's and Xeons. And much more realistic, with both catering to (roughly) the same market.
It's interesting that the 64bit version of Mini-GZIP why would perform so much better than the 32bit version. It must use a lot 64 bit integers. Well, that's the only explaination I can think of.
Looking at the prices on these things at NewEgg, it looks like I would have to pay $450 US just to get a crippled version with no dual channel, and $750 for the main product. Can somebody explain to me why this is a better idea than buying an Opteron 140? (currently $248 on pricewatch.) The Opteron is socket 940, supports dual channel, and (aside from clockspeed) seems quite superior to the Athlon64 nonFX. So why is the Athlon64 so much more expensive?
Of course I know it is from the Simpsons. Even a simpsons' joke gets old the 5 millionth time you hear it.
I'd still sooner have two processors. I'm blown away by what I have seen from Hyper Threading.
Ha! good article my ass.
The anandtech article runs a measly 18 pages, while tom's runs 53. So it is clear that the THG article is 194% better than the anandtech one (see fig.1).What's more, in our second test, "pretty pictures on the first page of the article" the beleaguered news site falls even further behind. While THG has 4 pictures on the first page, including one of the athlon XP (oh shiny!) anandtech has none. This could be due to a browser incompatibility or a hyper-active web-filter but we couldn't be bothered to check. (see fig.2)As we can see, the THG article has !DIVISION_BY_ZERO! times the images of the anandech one, and so it must be much better.
[I am quite surprised that this post passes the lameness filter, considering the amount of ugly ASCII art. The fact that
Ive bought into the marketing hype.
... compare today to the world of 16bit computing ... compare Windows XP to win3.11 ... Im sold.
...
I think the bad ass programers out there will totally dig having the extra registers. I know the programming monkeys out there are going to do some amazing shit with the A64 extensions.
32bit computing is what let us have what we have today
Im so sold
Macs are a lot more common in homes than Sun machines. I can still find mass market proprietary educational software for Macintosh computers. Where can I find something like Reader Rabbit for Solaris OS on SPARC hardware?
Will I retire or break 10K?
This must be the logic of the three companies (Intel, AMD, and IBM) who are coming out with the new 64 bit CPUS: 1: Mass market a 64 bit CPU 2: 3: Profit!!!
10 Bits= $.25
100 Bits= $.50
110 Bits= $.75
1000 Bits= 1 byte
Someone woke up with a case of the grumpies.
"Politicians find new names for institutions which under old names have become odious to the people."
I understand that most of the benchmarks are for 32-bit applications, but it still seems to me that the benchmarks aren't nearly that impressive. Intel's processor beat AMD in just about every benchmark. Granted, in some obscure 64-bit applications that barely anybody uses AMD wins, but that's not going to impress your typical user, because they don't use 64-bit applications yet.
It's like if Sony released the Playstation 2, but with no games at launch. Sure, it's better than PSOne, but if there are only PSOne games out, then why spend the money. The real truth of the matter is that your banking on companies to release 64-bit software applications, which won't even start to become nearly mainstream for at least a year. Then who knows, maybe Intel will release the Pentium64. Kudos to AMD though, because someone has to get the ball rolling.
Microsoft should hire me. I can write code that doesn't work faster than the guys they have doing it now.
I think AMD definately proved themselves here. I'm an Intel Fan Boy I guess, but I have to admit that if Intel had not added in a 2mb Lv3 Cache (P4 Extreme) AMD would have been a clear victor overall instead of the 32 to 15 score THG had.
However I do think that AMD still has a lot to do now especially with the Prescotts (P5's) coming out soon enough.
Although I still see a lack of a 64bit "need" in my daily work, if all the new programs next year can include 64bit support then i'm all for it.
Ave Molech Setting
It looks like OEMS will be rolling out notebooks with the new CPU right off:
Photo of Athlon 64 notebooks
Note also that the leftmost laptop appears to be made by Arima Computer Corporation, whose current production model is better known as the eMachines m5310. eMachines has made a very strong entry into the notebook market with that first model, and it appears they are trying to keep to the forefront by supporting the cutting-edge CPU.
Unofficial eMachines Notebook forum.
Dan East
Better known as 318230.
I'm interested in learning how to program. Do I start now or wait for 64 bit processors / 64 bit OS?
I don't see that claimed anything about patented algorithms not making for serious apps.
I wasn't referring to patents per se. I was alluding to the flaw in the "recompile everything" solution that Gentoo fans like to repeat, the fact that not all programs can be recompiled. Proprietary apps cannot in general be recompiled unless the copyright owner feels that recompiling the app for another architecture and hiring additional technical support staff would increase his net earnings. In some cases, the publisher will recompile it for you for the price of another seat of license.
Here's where my comment about patents comes in: Not all programs even have a free replacement. For example, look at the GIMP vs. Photoshop debate, where the patents encumbering CMYK and color space conversion are the main barriers to improvement of free software to the point where the print world would consider it.
automagically 64-bit-optimize [] a fairly large number of existing apps [] (Like PostgreSQL, Apache, OpenOffice, XFree86, GIMP, etc)
I'll give you GIMP, as some of its filters could benefit from CPU improvements, but a few of the apps you said would improve on x86-64 are in fact disk-bound (OOo and PostgreSQL), RAM-bound (GIMP or anything else that deals with large data sets), network-bound (Apache and Mozilla), video-bound (XFree86), or even human-thought-bound (any program used interactively by authors of works), and can't be made significantly faster by increasing CPU speeds. Some apps (such as Apache) can't run in homes due to contractual restrictions on residential Internet access.
Will I retire or break 10K?
*grumble grumble grumble* Well I'll cut my teeth on the downloadable document instead...
C. Sagan : A demon haunted world:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0345409469/
visit randi.org
Could you imagine a whole Beowulf cluster of t$#*ds;lkASEFP NO CARRIER
I have something in common with Stephen Hawking...
Will the same criticism be directed toward AMD for not having a G5 in the benchmark list?
(P4 is the step-child that nobody wants:-)
I've run Robot Odyssey for DOS on my Duron 750MHz.
Short review? Don't bother. In the innovation lab, your batteries die in seconds.
The moral here is that software hasn't always been forwards compatible. It used to be very noticable in timing routines, running Dune 2 on a fast 386, or, god forbid, a 486.
(For the Robot Odyssey example, play DroidQuest instead. It's a Java port of RO.)
I expect to see a lot of similar problems with OSS software. Not because of timing routines, but because of unclean code. For those who are accustomed to writing 32-bit code, making and keeping that code 64-bit clean is going to be a concious effort.
tasks(723) drafts(105) languages(484) examples(29106)
All "P4 3.2Ghz Extreme Edition" does is point out the part isn't a standard P4, not really obfuscating anything.
"Athlon 64 3200+" is somewhat misleading, but we grant them some marketing leeway to pave over technical differences.
"Athlon FX-51" is outright annoying for a 2.2Ghz "extreme edition" part, just like the bonkers Opteron names like 240/242/244/246 for the dual proc 1.4/1.6/1.8/2.0Ghz versions. Maybe cars don't have their horsepower stamped into their model names, but the frequency of a part is a very important factor after the type of a part in this market. I don't appreciate their attempts at obfuscation.
Is it just me, or is the Toms Hardware Guide movie video broken? It goes about 2 seconds and all visual just stops.
My main info source
Oh great. They either got rid of the L1 bridges or they've hidden them under that pretty little heat spreader. Now how are we supposed to overclock these things? Pop off the spreader? Probably crack the chip. I don't think AMD really wanted users OC'ing thier chips anyway so perhaps this is a little built in protection on thier part.
Anyways HACKERS GET CRACKIN, we've gotta OC these things before they're obsolete!
when?
I've died and gone to hell.
There is ZERO binary compatibility between HPPA and Itanium. PA binaries run under Itanium HP-UX invoke the "Aries" emulator, at a 2-6x slowdown.
...to a competitor releasing a faster chip -- increase the amount of on-die cache.
Chip H.
Check out AMD64 for upcoming ports of open source projects to the AMD64 platform.
#define DRM chmod 000
Actually, this is only partly true. Because the new AMD64 instruction set includes 8 more general purpose registers, compilers now generate far less load/store code during periods of register contention. This alone ALMOST makes up for the extra byte per instruction that 64-bit instructions require.
In other words, full 64-bit AMD64 instructions require slightly more bits per instruction than their IA32 equivalents to encode. But at the same time the TOTAL number of instructions in a given program has decreased because of less register pressure (which produces load/store code). These two competing factors tend to offset each other, although the presentation I saw indicated that the total code size has increased slightly (5% or so, IIRC).
You are correct in pointing out that the instruction cache will now be less effective because bytes per instruction have increased slightly. I assume instruction cache sizes will need to increase to compensate. But instruction memory bandwidth isn't really a huge issue anymore because instruction caches do such a good job of prefetching (and code accesses tend to be highly local, unlike data accesses).
intel would just use the existing ia-64 architecture and create a desktop cpu by reducing caches, etc?
what will happen now is that intel will have access to existing software created for itanium and benefit itanium because lots of software will be written for it because of the desktop level.
so in the end, 32 bits will be no more but there will be x86-64 and ia-64 only. 32 bits will be out soon.
just a thought.
Live your life each day as if it was your last.
...Since it would fail to execute any of Tom's x86-based benchmarks. Can we please do a comparison within an architecture category without people wanting to bench MIPs and z80s and other irrelivent chips?
I wanna see someone bench a G5 against a Power 4. (Could use Linux on each...) There's a comparison IBM does not want to see the light of day
Yes, I am sure, as I've read reports of apps using >4GB under OS 10.2.7 on a G5. The only references I could dig up right now are a brief blurb on ZDNet here: ZDNet Story and at the Register here: Register Story, though the register mistakingly says that the G5s use a 64 bit memory address space. A more detailed and accurate report of the G5 is available here: SoundOnSound Story. That last one really has all the info on this matter, though it doesn't mention 10.2.7's memory address capabilities specifically. You better believe, however, that Apple isn't shipping systems with 8 GB or RAM that can only address 4 GB, or the outcry would be quite palpable.
"I like systems, their application excepted", George Sand (French)
I, for one, still cling on to our 32-bit overlords!
These moderators crack me up, almost as much as this post did.
If you're merely doing 32-bit calculations then odds are a true 64-bit CPU will be slower, because to do the same work you have to move twice as much data to do it -- you have to fetch a 64-bit operation instead of a 32-bit one, and ditto for data.
There's nothing preventing 64 bit code from using 32 bit integers if that is all that is required. If 64 integers are required, then of course x86-64 has the advantage.
Additionally, the current x86-64 spec only implements 48-bit addressing, which should be more than adequate for about a decade or so, so address fetches only increase in size by 50%, not 100%
Sorry x86-64 does not support 48 bit pointers. And who would want to save 16 bits per pointer anyway, at the expense of unaligned accesses?
On top of that, x86-64 adds 4 general purpose registers
x86-64 has 16 general purpose registers, as opposed to x86-32's eight (and being very generous counting those registers as "general purpose").
Also, I believe 64 bit x86-64 has a 32-bit pointer mode for those apps that don't need to address more than 4GB of memory and want to save space storing pointers. So you get to choose what's best for your app: access to large amounts of memory if you need it or small pointers if you don't.
The only downside is slightly increased instruction size caused mostly by the need to encode additional registers in the instruction. Overall code size won't necessarily be larger, as more registers available means fewer instructions are needed to save and restore registers to the stack.
If only 32 operations are needed, a 32-bit processor will theoretically be faster since 64-bit ALU and address calculation operations take longer to perform than the equivalent 32-bit ops. If these operations are on the processor's "critical path", they can slow down the maximum clock speed attainable by the chip.
I don't know if I want to pay $6,600 for a desktop processor.
[RIAA] says its concern is artists. That's true, in just the sense that a cattle rancher is concerned about its cattle.
this page you will see the following stupid comment...
Two dumb things about this...
1. UT2003 is made by Epic
2. UT2003 was a premier product that AMD was showing off as a 64bit application running under SUSE linux on the Opteron when it was released.
Two big mistakes
Now that we have these 64 bit CPUs out in the wild, I would like to see a comparison of 32bit code vs. 64bit code -- To debunk the prevailing opinion that 64bit code will be faster.
Take SPEC, compile it with gcc and generate both 32bit and 64bit code. Let's see how the scores compare.
I'll bet it's a net loss for 64bit code. Has anyone done this?
It stands for "Fux0r." As in "Intel is gonna get fux0red."
The SPARC chipset has alot of historical software that PC manufacturers are yet to replace, such as those in the fields of the communications industry.
Windows based solutions look certain for the hard-to-change comms industry. Yet at the same time comes windows famous stability and security.
My guess is that anyone still on SPARC, isn't moving anywhere.
P.S. Seen the G5 recently? It seems everyone these days can put out a fast chip with the right connections.
has anyoen noticed that the article states that 64-bit systems can handle up to 16 terabytes or memory, stating that 2^64 = 18,446,744,073,709,551,161. now everyone knows this is impossible, since any even number to a power cannot result in an even number...good article, eh?
I've read the Tom's article and a few posts here at Slashdot, and I was thinking that the P4EE is just the usual FUD from Intel.
"We'll have this processor in a few months that can beat this current processor that's out now -- for around the same price!"
Seems like the usual in the hardware industry to me. Something better is always just around the corner.
hey!
People have finally started benchmarking benchmarking sites.
It's official: the end of the world is nigh.
"Accept that some days you are the pigeon, and some days you are the statue." - David Brent, Wernham Hogg
I have literally just returned from the Australian launch of the Athlon 64/FX (thanks for the free lunch AMD!).
:)
Here's the problem I see - all the benchmarks etc are focusing on comparisons between a 3.2GHz Pentium 4 and the new Athlon 64. Depending on the benchmark, both seem roughly equal in performance.
Now, the Pentium 4 3.2GHz is slightly cheaper than the new Athlon, but here's the kicker - the SLOWEST Athlon 64 CPU you can buy right now is equivalent to a 3.2GHz Pentium 4, but for MUCH LESS MONEY I can buy the 2.4C Pentium 4 and overclock it to 3.2GHz (giving the FSB a nice boost in the process). That's the real challenge I see the new Athlon coming up against - people who buy the 2.4C and overclock it to gain equivalent performance of a much more expensive chip of either flavour.
Not to mention the crazy decision to limit the plain jane Athlon 64 to single channel memory.... that is going to hurt bandwidth performance, and the alternative of buying the Athlon 64 FX-51 is a costly proposition given a 2.4GHz Pentium 4 can basically get the same performance and use dual channel memory.
Anyway, I hope they do succeed so that CPU performance continues to climb higher faster... bring on Dawn in a game environment already!!!
Visceral Psyche Films
Check your own facts.a sp
http://www.microsoft.com/WindowsXP/64bit/default.