The Intel "Itanium" ?

[DSTA]

Thus there will be no reason to take a Clawhammer over a P4, until there are 64 bit versions of Windows and 64 bit applications available for the home user.

I also doubt the home user will profit from 64 bit in a long while. Remember how long the switch from 16 to 32 Bit took.

But I think there's a big demand for (relativly) cheap systems that can handle more than 4 GB of RAM. Itanium is not only too dang slow, but also way too expensive with all the work that has to be put into new code. Hence the flop.

If AMD have a working Linux distro and some databases ready with the launch of the Clawhammer, I think they'll do better.

 

[Novgrod]

It was called Whistler, I believe. (the Windows 64 bit OS) and I actually saw a CD of it Friend worked at compaq server, so a couple summers ago I got the tour and saw Itaniums (Itania?) and whistler. The itania were kinda funny in that they required an insane amount of cooling. Loudest cpus I've ever seen.

I'm not at all sure that it's compatible with the claw/sledgehammer, but I know x86-64 will have numerous forms of linux (30% of servers) supporting the architecture/isa/whatever.

I could be entirely off my gourd, though.

 

[imgod2u]

Ok, "whistler" was the code name for WinXP, NOT just the 64-bit. The 64-bit version of WinXP has already been demonstrated and it was on a Ultraspark if I remember correctly, could've been Itanium. Linux is open source and is free, so porting an x86-64 version shouldn't be that much of a deal, whether M$ will release one is a whole other thing. Think about how much time and money it would require to optimize for 64-bit, and consider how small a niche market the Hammer will initially be, is it worth it? I'm guess the Hammer's 64-bit capability will be somewhat like the 386's original 32-bit capability, it will go unused until enough people have processors capable of x86-64 and judging from Intel's hold on the market, that'll only happen if Intel released an x86-64 processor for the desktop.

 

[Degenerate]

It is always funny how intel will make something, and AMD will follow.

 

[andreasl]

<< It is always funny how intel will make something, and AMD will follow. >>


What do you mean by that?

 

[Sestar]

Yes do explain, considering AMD is releasing a 64bit chip on an utterly diffrent architecture then intel, its like saying intel always follows sun because sun has 64bit chips.

 

[Mookow]

<< It is always funny how intel will make something, and AMD will follow. >>



Right. x86-64 is just following IA-64. STEP AWAY FROM THE CRACK PIPE. The x86-64 instruction set is AMDs creation, not Intel's. If Intel does go ahead with Yamhill, Intel might be paying liscensing fees TO AMD, instead of AMD paying fees to Intel. 64 bit processors will be needed, if for nothing else, for their ability to address more memory.

 

[Sohcan]

<< It is always funny how intel will make something, and AMD will follow. >>

Actually, it's more like the microprocessor designers at Intel, AMD, Sun, IBM, Motorola, and HP follow what the computer architecture researchers at major universities and mainframe thinktanks developed decades ago.

 

[TwilightZone77]

Some of you seem to be missing that ClawHammer has other core improvements as well, not just x86-64 arctitecture. It will show vast improvement in 32-bit applications as well as 64-bit apps. x86-64 is just something added in there so that it has support for 64-bit programs. Just like Intel's "Yamhill" is just an addition on the processor that may or may not be enabled. Many people will indeed not be using 64-bit programs on their clawhammers.