Intel ro be raped of buisiness?

[Stinger 0]

I was thinking and reading and doin what I do, and have noticed that Intel's desires to take on 64 bit computing are almost nothing at all. They have even said that Home Users dont need 64 bit CPU's. And with MS now supporting 64 bit cpu's thats a bonus. Awhile ago Intel and MS both blew off 64 bit for home users. But now MS has switched sides leaving Intel screwed on the curb. I'm thinking come September Intel is screwed at least for enthusiasts that is. And I have a question also, when the Athlon 64 comes out in September, will it be in AMD using desktops, or will the majority still be old 32 Bit XP's?

[RooK 0]

Forget home users, the big money is in servers. When buying servers, people put in orders for more cpus (and more expensive ones at that) than any home user. Here 64bit will quickly take up, and this is where Intel will lose the most market. Cray is already making a super computer based off Opertons and Sun Systems is more than likely going to use them for their smaller servers. Intel is losing one of their biggest markets.

64bit will eventually spread to home users, how long I don't know. But that's the beauty of the hammer/clawhammer design AMD came up with. It runs both 32 and 64bit apps. So, you can buy a Athlon64 and run it in 32bit now, and upgrade to 64bit in a year or so.

Intel, are you and nVidia sharing marketing plans?

[Stinger 0]

Intel, are you and nVidia sharing marketing plans?

LMAO. Well, Sun says there is a good chance they wil be incorporated with their servers small and large. No idea about Cray nor do I care they can go sit on a stick and rotate. I haven't heard much about the Itanium 64 bit platforms but I remember reading that they are better than they were expected to be.

Forget home users, the big money is in servers. When buying servers, people put in orders for more cpus (and more expensive ones at that) than any home user. Here 64bit will quickly take up, and this is where Intel will lose the most market.

I dont know much about the Itanium right now so I cant say that this is true or not but with so little known I think it would be ignorant to go ahead and give the prize to AMD.

When it comes time for me to buy my next computer, whoever has the best 64 bit home user technology is who's getting my money. Yeah even if Intel isnt doing so hot.

P.S. Isn't the Itanium backward compatible with 32 bit apps?

[firefly2442 0]

What is the difference between 32bit and 64bit?

[RooK 0]

Stinger, no it isn't. That's why you might have heard quieted talks of Intels Yamaha core. But they've never even shown a prototype of it that worked as far as I know.

Firefly, uhg... can't remember I'd have to look it up somewhere, but it offers faster moving of more data or something like that.

[Dark Ranger 0]

Yamaha Core? That is news to me.

About 32Bit/64Bit:

RooK, that is basically right. The main difference is this, without getting too technical:

The new processor's most prominent feature is what's called "64Bit-Addressing", and what AMD has called the "64-x86". This means that the new processors can analyze 64 bits of data instead of the current 32 bits of data. It will greatly improve performance in computers, specifically Servers, because they can access huge amounts of memory instead of seeking the hard drive for data.

And from what I understand, the 64-x86 architecture allows the processor to be backward compatable with 32Bit addressing as well.

[Stinger 0]

I did some checking and I think the Itanium is 32 bit backward compatible. And just to add something here Firefly, AMD's 64 bit cpu's dont read any 32 bit code that it uses, it transforms it directly into 64 bit and then has to read it. If they could just make it read 32 bit I think it would be much faster.

[firefly2442 0]

Thanks for the explainations. What are some bottlenecks for CPUs that they're currently working on? Such as 32/64 bit, the really small .14 or whatever transistors, bus speed? etc...?

And, do all these factors then make up the total CPU speed?

[NurFACE 0]

These are some links that can kick start information concerning 64 bit. 64bit is a bigger highway that data can travel to access RAM creating a faster system due to more instructions can be coded. Computers use a bit 1 or 0 so in other words 32 bit is a double word were as 64bits = a paragraph or quad word. "All in one" by Mike Meyers is my source.

http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/64bit/e...uation/top5.asp

http://search390.techtarget.com/sDefinitio...98697%2C00.html

http://burks.bton.ac.uk/burks/foldoc/66/0.htm

[NurFACE 0]

Intel is still in the hunt when it comes to 64 bit rather it be servers or home users. Intel marketing team knows what its doing. The 64bit wheel wasn't invented without Intel being fully aware of AMD. AMD marketing scheme was to intruduce 64 bit this year, so now to major markets AMD and Intel will continue to collect big money. http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=8858

[RooK 0]

Currently bottlenecks for cpus are memory, data pathways and other compenents leading to it. 64bit cures the 2nd one, and the AMD Hammer CPUs cure the first one. How? AMD is going to be the first to put a memory controller on the cpu instead of on the mb. What this does is allow for memory to be used in perfect sync with the cpu and reduce latency to increase data movement to and from the memory. Needless to say, this makes a big difference. The latter will be solved with SATA, DDRII, HyperTransport (Another AMD technology that Intel is SOL on), and the latest PCI spec.

Itanium, even the second version, from what I can gather is 64bit only. Their other cpu (do a search) I believe is Yamaha or Yamahill (came to me earlier) and it incorporates a 64-x86 technology.

Transistors speed up cpu performance somewhat, but then again thats a very small margin. Current cpus from Intel or AMD are .13 and both will hit .09 either late this year to mid next year.

[Stinger 0]

YamhillOfficially it's still being denied, but it has been confirmed by so many sources that there's almost no possibillity for doubt; Intel has developed a form of x86-64 technology. A two percent increase in die-space would be sufficient to expand the core with 64 bit possibillities, just like AMD did (although these probably aren't mutually compatible). It's unlikely that this techique will be enabled in the first generation of Prescotts. First because it would not be good for IA-64 and second because it had to be announced already if it were, this in order to give developers the chance to adapt their software. Should the situation occur that 4GB of memory isn't enough for desktops, before the Itanium for home users is a reality, then Intel is prepared to extend the 32 bit series.

The answer to HyperTransport: Of course also server-editions of the Prescott will become available, in the form of Nocona. Since the Itanium-serie has been using the Pentium 4 bus since the McKinley core, the chipsets that where developed for the Itanium 2 (and later) can also be used by processors like Prescott and Nocona. The most interesting candidate for such an exchange is a version of E8870. By using a system with Scalability Ports and I/O hubs, with this new generation chipset a network of chips can almost be built in the same easy and flexible way as with the HyperTransport based AMD-8000. The major difference between the two is that AMD has placed HyperTransport and the memory controller on the processor itself. This ensures a reduced latency and probably also cheaper mainboards, but it will probably be a less flexible solution when you're thinking about an upgrade. In addition Intel can still use simple north- and southbridge mainboards, whereas a Hammer mainboard cannot ignore HyperTransport