Slashdot Mirror
Intel Shipping Merced Engineering Samples
JDC writes "Apparently, Intel has first silicon on their IA-64 processor. I wonder how long till I can play Descent on one of those babies... ;) " Linux has been working on the simulators, and is reported to work on the actual silicon. However, contrary to prior reports, Windows does boot and run on the engineering prototype.
Well, yes and no...
1. 64 Bit Memory and IO
IA32 has 64 bit memory bus and instruction that can access with 1 atomic operation. However,
there's no 64-bit single cycle arithmetic...
(unless you count CMPXCHG8B, CDQ, FILD, FISTP, MOVQ, SHLD, SHRD, and MMX packed bit instructions)
2. Virtual/Real memory access. With IA32, you can access more memory than 2^32 *bytes* of memory
(up to 2^36 *bytes* just not linearly), but not as much 2^64 *bytes*...
However, for the most part, those are the main differences between 32bit and 64bit architectures.
Never-Nt-User
Minor quibble with your post:
"the reason the first Pentium Pro's didn't do so well when they came out was due to the fact that they didn't support 16-bit code very well."
Not exactly, but close. The Pentium Pro's run 16-bit code like a screaming demon. The problem is that Win95/8 frequently switch between 16 and 32 bit mode (thunking?) and that operation was very slow on the PP's.
Geeky modern art T-shirts
If thats the case, my computer is going to be a workstation. I really want to move beyond 32bit, with the security of having a fair idea of the architecture.
-Yarn - Rio Karma: Excellent
May be this explains why there is no longer an alpha-NT alliance. It's not needed in MS mind, may be?
What does 64 bit offer that 32 bit hasn't got? What I'm asking is, is there a big difference in raw performance because of the increase in bits, or does it have more to do with addressing etc. I was never very good at hardware at University, so can someone enlighten me?
Anyone else notice the article said they demonstrated Merced running on W2K and Linux? Surely it should be the other way round -- W2K and Linux running on Merced?
"The invisible and the non-existent look very much alike." -- Delos B. McKown
Microsoft has supposedly been working on Win64 (for the alpha) since 1994 or so. One would hope that they nearly have something by now!
--
Business. Numbers. Money. People. Computer World.
I only want to hear bad things about Microsoft. I don't want to hear about MS software running! I want to hear about security problems and how they are clueless about writing and kind of decent software. I want to see stories of how they gave Mother Theresa a hard time about bundling software in the Vatican. I want to see Bill Gate getting a pie in the face. Ziff Davis has a story a day about Microsoft evil rampage against good people in the computer industry. Why cant you! DAMM YOU LIBERAL SLASHDOT MONKEYS
Um, is it just me, or is the typical reaction to a first-silicon of a supposedly very fast CPU not that "gee, this will be the new engine for e-business"? Sounds extremely silly to me. Instead of attempting to refute Apple's praise of the G4 (hrm, with its Velocity Engine -- where do these people get their terms?) they start talking about engines for e-business. Weird.
main(O){10<putchar(4^--O?77-(15&5128 >>4*O):10)&&main(2+O);}
I believe Intel is working with (and invested in) Cygnus to help GCC with Merced compatibility and performance. Anyone else know of any official statements?
-- soldack
It doesn't matter that Win64 was running. The original poster's point is still valid: A large reason why W2K ran at all is probably due to the large amount of legacy 32-bit code that's supported by the IA32 emulation on the chip.
After all, the reason the first Pentium Pro's didn't do so well when they came out was due to the fact that they didn't support 16-bit code very well. So, even though everyone was running a Win32 platform, most people didn't get much bang for their Pentium Pro buck due to the 16-bit code laying around under the hood.
--Joe--
Program Intellivision!