IA-64 and x86-64. Why the conflict?

[cloasters]

Seems that there's excitement about the fact that AMD uses x86-64 architecture in the Athlon 64 and Opteron processors. Is this a genuine issue? If AMD has to make their CPU's IA compatible, what's the complaint about IA-64 vs. x86-64?

[cloasters]

Surely one of our august members knows the answer to this??

[Aedan]

IA64 is Intel's 64bit stuff.
x86-64 is AMD's 64bit stuff.

They are not compatible.

IA-64 is a new architecture, whereas x86-64 is an extension of IA-32. x86-64 provides better backward compatibility for 32bit stuff - it should be faster.

Now you can see where the problems might be?

Áedán

[cloasters]

Thank you for the information, Aedan. Am I wrong in thinking that there is no real need for 64-bit capability for SOHO? Perhaps 64-bit is only useful in Server-land. Intel's attempt to encroach on big-iron territory was simple marchitecture? At least for a while.

After Intel made a sally into 64-bit territory, AMD had no choice but to expand into 64-bit. It desperately needs to gain a significant share of the SMP small Server market. AMD's present 760 MP chipset, while a good performer, is not adequate for "money is riding on this" Server duties.

Recent news about UMC's capabilities doesn't bode well for the house that Jerry built.

[Aedan]

IA-64 = serious server side (They hope!)

x86-64 = SoHo

Not sure who "64" bitness is actually aimed at for AMD.

Áedán

[Daniel ~]

Let it be me! ":O}

[cloasters]

Thank you for your explanation, Aedan!

Duuh, now I get it. AMD's x86-64 Athlon 64 and Operon are not in competiton with Intel's foray into Big Time Server territory? They are going up against the small SMP Server market that Intel already has the lion's share of?

Does this mean that the Itanium's dismal 32-bit performance doesn't matter, because it won't be handling any 32-bit code anyway?

[Aedan]

Originally posted by cloasters
They are going up against the small SMP Server market that Intel already has the lion's share of?

Does this mean that the Itanium's dismal 32-bit performance doesn't matter, because it won't be handling any 32-bit code anyway?

That's the way it looks to me! If you've spent all that money on a Itanium system, why would you want to run 32bit code on it? There is a reason why you bought a 64bit system!

I would suspect that AMD would do better eating away at the bottom of the market, constantly pushing Intel further and further up. I'm no businessman though!

Áedán

[cloasters]

It looks like AMD has been trying to take the low end of the market away from Intel. Before Santa Clara understood that the Athlon, later T-Bird was eating it alive, AMD was kicking posterior. I didn't expect Intel to continue cutting prices after initially doing so to dull AMD's lead. Intel realized that it would be an ongoing battle, and kept right on slashing prices over the next two years. Who knew?

Reviews say that the Opteron is a great performer. For AMD's sake, it has to be. It will still be many Mhz behind a Zeon, and Zeon's have tumbled in price.

Hopefully, corporate hardware buyers aren't fooled by clock speed alone! The Opteron and Athlon 64 have to be a year ahead of Intel's P4's and Xeons in performance and price. That's how the Athlon originally overcame Intel's then current offerings.

If the Opteron and Athlon 64 are ho-hum, AMD may perish. If Intel becomes the only supplier of CPU's(sorry, Via doesn't count--yet)it's back to the days of far overpriced CPU's and creeping improvements in performance.

[cloasters]

Originally posted by cloasters
It looks like AMD has been trying to take the low end of the market away from Intel. Before Santa Clara understood that the Athlon, later T-Bird was eating it alive, AMD was kicking posterior. I didn't expect Intel to continue cutting prices after initially doing so to dull AMD's lead. Intel realized that it would be an ongoing battle, and kept right on slashing prices over the next two years. Who knew?

Reviews say that the Opteron is a great performer. For AMD's sake, it has to be. It will still be many Mhz behind a Zeon, and Zeon's have tumbled in price.

Hopefully, corporate hardware buyers aren't fooled by clock speed alone! The Opteron and Athlon 64 have to be a year ahead of Intel's P4's and Xeons in performance and price. That's how the Athlon originally overcame Intel's then current offerings.

If the Opteron and Athlon 64 are ho-hum, AMD may perish. If Intel becomes the only supplier of CPU's(sorry, Via doesn't count--yet)it's back to the days of far overpriced CPU's and creeping improvements in performance.

Me did bad, sorry! This really doesn't look like a software topic.