Re: It is almost certain now, INTEL will have 64bit x86 !!
From: Rob Young (young_r_at_encompasserve.org)
Date: 02/11/04
- Next message: None: "Re: Boeing 747 turns 35 Years Old"
- Previous message: Bart Zorn: "Re: [TCPIP V5.4] DHCP client problem/observation"
- In reply to: JF Mezei: "Re: It is almost certain now, INTEL will have 64bit x86 !!"
- Next in thread: Keith Parris: "Re: It is almost certain now, INTEL will have 64bit x86 !!"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Date: 11 Feb 2004 08:50:21 -0600
In article <402A08E4.BABDF3A7@istop.com>, JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@istop.com> writes:
> Rob Young wrote:
>> Here's the basic problem. Were you aware that Intel actually writes a heap of
>> drivers for Windows? And that when Windows XP was being launched, both Intel
>> and Microsoft helped out some hardware vendors by assisting them with driver
>> writing?
>
> How much are drivers specific to a motherboard ? When I buy Windows, does it
> come with all possible drivers for all possible motherboards ? I realise that
> people like Compaq loved to have their own proprietary drivers for keyboards
> etc. But this wasn't necessary.
But it most likely is a big problem for Windows. Especially given
the myriad combinations of hardware - not just motherboards.
>
> if the AMD 64 buit 8086 can run 32 bit Windows out of the box, just like a
> Dell box can, then as a start, AMD doesn't need to fund a rewrite of Windows.
>
Right. But it comes back to Win64. Win64 for Itanium is fully
funded, and Win64 for Opteron isn't.
>
> But Microsoft already has the experience from its port of Windows to Alpha. So
> porting the current version of window to the 64 bit 8086 shouldn't be that big
> a project for Microsoft.
>
It isn't a problem for Micrsoft. It is a problem for AMD.
Remember this:
http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=14049
Here's the basic problem. Were you aware that Intel actually writes a heap of
drivers for Windows? And that when Windows XP was being launched, both Intel
and Microsoft helped out some hardware vendors by assisting them with driver
writing?
Unfortunately, Windows for AMD64 is not a high priority for Microsoft. By which
we mean that it's not going to go out of its way to help out AMD, without the
chip company paying a heap of money for the effort. And AMD's pockets aren't
that deep, nor has it that many software developers it can spare for the task.
On re-reading those two paragraphs, is the problem any clearer?
>
>> at all. Intel has billions and is making billions:
>
> From its 8086 line, and Intel isn't about to jeoperdize those billions by
> cannabalising is 8086 line to push a dead end bloated expensive architecture.
>
Ah, contraire. Perhaps you need to pick up "Only the paranoid
survive" by Andy Grove. Intel has a history of cannabilizing,
slashing and burning, etc.
Now granted, 8086 is the breadwinner. But according to Intel,
all things come to pass, hence a new architecture.
> Intel needs to have a chip that is easy to upgrade and make faster and which
> it can achieve faster than AMD or other competitors.
Or just as fast, cheaper and backed by billions in marketing,
development and promotion.
>
>> I will bet that if they can make the x86 ISA pig fly, they will
>> make Itanium fly AND will throw the proper hundred million dollar
>> chunks in the correct directions to ensure it is successful.
>
> The thing is that the 8086 is like a feather whereas the IA64 is like an
> anvil. Which one is easier to make fly ? Which one costs less to lift to
> higher altitude/speed ?
>
Well there are hints of which has a lot more headroom. With
IA32 hardware removed, the IA64 logic is 17 million transistors.
Prescott logic is 70 million transisitors. Give the Alpha boys
20 or 30 million logic transistors to play with... you get the
picture.
>> HP must
>> be excited to see high-end server costs come down to the Xeon level
>> (they make bucks on VMS services and NSK services). IBM and Sun
>> aren't nearly as excited.
>
> HP is excited at having yet another excuse to provide to customers "wait
> another 3 years, IA64 will e better by then".
Shoot , it is better now in many areas.
>
> Sorry, but HP must stand on its own with whatever Intel offers TODAY. If HP
> starts telling its customers to wait hold off on purchases for anyther 3 years
> until IA64 is really ready for prime time, guess what will happen to HP's
> business computing unit ?
>
Keith mentioned 30% cheaper Itanium hardware. That obviously is
a beginning point. VMS running on much cheaper hardware is a good
thing.
> And in 3 years, assuming IA64 is still alive, will you be telling customers
> about that great promise from Intel that 3 years from then (6 from now), Intel
> intends to deliver an IA64 that also makes coffee ?
No. Just give Intel's billions time to work its magic. Keep in
mind, it is all about running a highly successful business. To
suppose they lost their edge and direction is something I'm not
seeing (otherwise the 2 billion in profits they made last quarter
are an anomoly?)
It will be two-pronged - development and marketing. The development
that will make the difference will be building block high-end
servers. OEM's high-end server staff will be much smaller. We
can predict this by looking at EV7 and cranking that technology
up a notch whereby the OEM would literally snap Intel pieces
together. That is the scary part about it. True commodization of
high-end servers - brought to you by Intel. A guess on my
part? Not much of a guess. Aaron used to be quite vocal, he now works
for Intel. There are a number of posts like this. He had
very legitimate points then - now he is on the other side of
the fence and that group is HIGHLY talented:
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=sfqaffk5ugg.fsf%40kraftwerk.pa.dec.com&oe=UTF-8&output=gplain
From: Aaron Spink <spink@kraftwerk.pa.dec.com>
Subject: Re: DEC/Intel deal and Alpha future...
Date: 1997/11/04
Performance! Don't assume that IA64 will be a magic bullet for
intel. They will still be off of the performance curve and by
designing your own chips and systems together as an integrated system
you can come out way ahead. Remember, processors are just the grease
for the systems that they go in. Processors are really quite useless
without a system that can take advantage of them and visa versa.
It isn't much of an assumption that the team he is a part of
is designing an -integrated system-. A system on a chip ala EV7.
But just a guess ;-)
Rob
Men with walkie-talkie I'm home again to you babe
Men with flashlights waving You know it makes me wonder
Up upon the tower Sittin' in the quiet slipstream
The clock reads daylight savin' Rollin' in the thunder
-- Neil Young
- Next message: None: "Re: Boeing 747 turns 35 Years Old"
- Previous message: Bart Zorn: "Re: [TCPIP V5.4] DHCP client problem/observation"
- In reply to: JF Mezei: "Re: It is almost certain now, INTEL will have 64bit x86 !!"
- Next in thread: Keith Parris: "Re: It is almost certain now, INTEL will have 64bit x86 !!"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Relevant Pages
|
