Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Intel Begins Shipping 64-bit Prescotts

Posted by CowboyNeal on from the unheralded-releases dept.

Rucas writes "With a minimum of fanfare, Intel has begun shipping a version of the Pentium 4 with 64-bit instruction set extensions. The news came to light not via an Intel press release, but rather through the spec sheet for a new server from IBM. In the midst of the new IBM eServer xSeries servers based on the recently released 64-bit Xeon is a blade server powered by the 64-bit Prescott. This marks the first product appearance of the new CPU."

5 of 411 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Amazing by MBCook · · Score: 0, Redundant
    I wasn't into computers when the switch from 286 to 386 happened (I was 2 when it was released in '85). But I can imagine all sorts of situations where a normal person would bump up against numbers bigger than 64k. If you want to keep track of finances and you do it with integers (better than floating point for money), then you max out at ~65000 pennies. That $650. It's not that hard to wrap around a 16bit number in real life.

    32 bit numbers work much better. The main reason to upgrade is not because people are using so many 64 bit numbers, but because memory space is becomming a problem and the added memory (or even just extra address space) can make a big difference. This isn't the revolutionary leap that the 386 was. I doubt we'll see such a big difference again.

    --
    Comment forecast: Bits of genius surrounded by a sea of mediocrity.
  2. Re:Figures by kinema · · Score: 1, Redundant

    I would be very carefull about saying that nothing compares to an Intel chipset and CPU combo. You might want to take a look at Apple's dual 970 offerings.

  3. Re:Crapola by OzRoy · · Score: 0, Redundant

    This will probably be a similar situation to the original Celerons. Where AMD released a cheap CPU, and Intel had to scramble to release a similar product, and what came out was just a neutered P3 rebranded as Celeron, and was really quite crap.

  4. Re:Who cares by mirko · · Score: 0, Redundant

    SX or DX ?

    --
    Trolling using another account since 2005.
  5. Re:Amazing by MBCook · · Score: 0, Redundant

    I understand that, but if you're working with tons of 32 bit numbers, it's much faster to do it with native 32 bit support than to do it using 16 bit math which takes longer because of the hoops you must jump through (relative to native 32 bit). Sorry if you misunderstood me.

    --
    Comment forecast: Bits of genius surrounded by a sea of mediocrity.