Slashdot Mirror
AMD Predicts End of 32-bit Processors
DDumitru writes "Infoworld
reports that AMD predicts it will stop producing 32-bit processors by the end
of 2005. By depending on price cuts for Athlon-64 and Opteron, AMD is predicting that
it's sales of 32-bit CPUs will fall off and obsolete 32-bit systems in less
than 3 years. This is either a push forward, or a tactic to try to capture the 64/32 bit
standard leaving Intel in the rear. Or it could just be hype." I'm not in a hurry to ditch any of my 32-bit machines, so long as I get them replaced by 2038.
Repeat after me:
It's = It is
No, the REAL issue is memory space. 32 bit just won't cut it anymore for large database servers and the like, regardless of the movement for clustering.
The thing is, in the desktop it will take longer for machines to require more than 4/8 GB of memory.
end of x86 processors maybe. Last I checked the 32-bit ARM cores were not only speedy but took quite a bit less power than the average x86.
Tom
Someday, I'll have a real sig.
The Linux-on-Alpha project already did all the heavy lifting needed to run 64 bit almost ten years ago. Linux and *BSD is already running 64 bit on PowerPC. Virtually any package you can download that has an active support community is already 64 bit ready.
I think that AMD is just saying that *they* will stop making 32-bit processors by 2005 but not that 32-bit processors will be dead by then. It is reasonable for AMD to end production of the 32-bit processors because AMD does not have a lot of manufacturing capacity and they will want to make their 64-bit processors rather than 32-bit processors with the capacity that they do have. Also, AMD's 64-bit processors are also better 32-bit processors than many of the 32-bit processors that have been sold in the past.
The 32-bit processors will obviously be around for a long time yet but they just will not be made by AMD. Intel will keep making them and probably other companies such as VIA and that chinese 'red storm' company (can't recall the name of it) will make them for many years to come. The old 16-bit 286 processors are still made today, even though Intel stopped making them years ago.
I think you missed the point.
They are talking about normal PC processors.
Not your PDA or Pocket calculator.
AMD is in the PDA market with a few products already out. (Low power CPUs)
When they shrink the Opteron to 90nm in the spring of 2004, the chips will use only 45 watts of power unlike Intel's upcoming Prescott which will use 90-105 watts.
I run my A7M266-D, with 2 Athlon MP 1800+ processors, plugged into a Kill-A-Watt meter. All signs point to it being cheaper to buy a dual opteron over the not so long term simply for the power saving features at idle. I figure that the new machine would pay for itself in less than a year. I'll be buying as soon as there are new opterons readily available so the price on the old ones will be low.
Perhaps you should try being captian not-so-obvious and look and see how much it costs to leave that dual Athlon MP, which uses about the same amount of power at idle as at full utilization, on all the time. Also, if you don't need the capacity, why did you buy it in the first place?
Same w. CD-ROMS at $20.00 new, etc.
Why is that? Generally smaller geometries result in lower yields.
.15 nm to .1 nm, the chips/wafer increases by (.15/.1)^2 = 2.25 times as many chips.
Yes, but the greater number of chips/wafer almost always more than compensates. Remember the increase in the chips/wafer is the square of the inverse of the decrease. I.e., if you go from
Ooh, a sarcasm detector. Oh, that's a real useful invention.
You call that punishment? Somebody doesn't know how to have a good time.
The cost of packaging, shelf space, support, etc. outweighs the cost of hardware by so much at that level that, even if the hardware were essentially free, the product price would be around $30 or so.
Then:
On the other end, at $5 or so they become worth producing again (see PICs and such) because, at that point, no packaging or support is expected...
I'm not so sure I agree with this logic. You can buy OEM CPUs today, even for high-end CPUs, with no packaging other than a small grey box (no sink/fan/documentation/etc). I recently purchased an Athlon 2400+ like this, and it was about $20 less than the full packaged version with sink/fan.
I've seen older CPUs in computer shops going for $30 to $50, from old MMX 233 Pentiums on up to mid-range PIII chips. I see no reason the AMD 32-bit chips won't be sold at a low price once the manufacturer calls them "obsolete". It happens all the time...
NGWave - Fast Sound Editor for Windows
I don't know why I'm doing your work for you, but you should try educating yourself.
Check out BIOS32 services. It's a 32-bit entrance for BIOS services, and it's an industry standard...
PDF link
Many processors use dynamic logic that prevents them from operating reliably below a specified clock rate. Check the spec sheet for your processor before you underclock it.
Mea navis aericumbens anguillis abundat
I remember reading elsewhere that the 36 Kwords of ROM were hard coded by hand threading the bit patterns with tiny wires and magnetic cores, and then they were sealed in a block of epoxy. Turnaround time to fix bugs took weeks.
No, the REAL issue is memory space. 32 bit just won't cut it anymore for large database servers and the like, regardless of the movement for clustering.
Every intel chip since the PPRO can handle 64gb of ram
Send lawyers, guns, and money!
>(turns out that msi doesn't have a bios that works with the Barton 2500+ at 333, you have to up the voltage (voids warranty) and use kingston memory - but kingston says they no longer support this (brand-new) motherboard, because they've had too many problems with it)
That's odd. I've sold a lot of those boards using PC2700 RAM without any problems at all. Perhaps kingston is supplying garbage memory. I don't know. I do this without making a single change to the BIOS, except to set the CPU to the proper speed.
You must use an AGP card for video to get this to work if you are talking about PC3200 RAM. AOpen, using the same chipset, warns that you cannot use such highspeed memory and expect stability with the onboard video.
It's all pointless anyways as the speed increases are infinitessimal compared to the heartache of an unstable system.
Ask anyone selling the low end stuff their return rates and compare it to the high end parts. There is a difference. I've seen it as a retailer for both end of the spectrum.
(BTW: Some PC Chips boards that don't include hacked and pirated BIOSes have been known to have bad IDE controllers that randomly corrupt data, due to their false advertising. I've been bitten by this a few years ago. Never again.)
PC Chips mode of business:
- Fake Cache
- BIOS Hacking (as above)
- "Customizable" chipsets (translate to: We use our inhouse garbage chipset with broken IDE support and remark it to whatever you like)
- Fake CPU speeds (*STILL!* K7SOM/K7SEM users beware)
- Paper thin PCBs (my experience)
- Website served from 56k modem (or so it seems), written by ESL students.
- No support after you buy it (If you get more than 1 working BIOS update you are so very lucky)
- Above is likely due to them PIRATING BIOSes from other boards (own experience, not unusual)
- Deceiving naming of products (That's a 666 Mhz VIA board)
There's also unverified rumours that the owners of PC Chips were into CPU remarking.
Think about that next time you buy PC Chips (or, *shudder* ASRock or ECS [same company, PC Chips has a need to change their name often, I wonder why!])
Oh, and before you think I'm just doing this for my business, I try to add more margin in for the junk parts as I know I'll just need to deal with returns right away.
If you could be told what you can see or read, then it follows that you could be told what to say or think - BoC
>You can get a motherboard w. duron 2000 cpu for $100 CAN (about $75.US). Split the cost in 2 - half for mb, half for cpu, we are under the $40.00 price point already.
Yes, I know about those. They're a scam, there is no such thing as a duron 2000.
They are infact Duron 1.3 processors on PC Chips (aka "ECS") boards with BIOSes hacked to display "PRO 2000+". If you boot such a machine in linux it will disregard the incorrect BIOS info and show you the true speed.
You are right, though, the spilt is roughly half and half between the board and CPU.
The common names for such boards:
K7SOM+
K7SEM
If you could be told what you can see or read, then it follows that you could be told what to say or think - BoC
You're still limited to 4GB-(kernel prot.) per process.
THIS THING CAN TURN ON A DIME, MACROSSZERO STYLE ALSO FUCK BETA, ~NYORON
>ASRock are actually 100% owned by AsusTek
*Were* owned by them. Don't go about saying that!
It even threatens legal action against Asrock customers who associate these motherboards with Asustek, in a surprising example of Chinese Walls.
I have to explain to enough people bamboozled by this sort of half-truth I don't need more people saying that!
>ASRock boards are EOL Asus products.
Now that is completely wrong.
Many AS Rock boards carry PC Chips parts, part numbers, and PC Chips designs. PC Chips and ECS are pretty much the same company (or at least sell identical products, down to everything but the color of PCB), however, ECS is the "high support" (as in they can speak English properly) version of PC Chips.
The quality of Asrock boards is entirely different from the quality of Asustek boards, the memo continues.
If you could be told what you can see or read, then it follows that you could be told what to say or think - BoC