Re: It is almost certain now, INTEL will have 64bit x86 !!
From: Robert Klute (robert_klute_removethis_at_hp.com)
Date: 02/20/04
- Next message: dittman_at_dittman.net: "Re: VMS 7.2-2 IDE Boot on AXP164SX (EB164 Variation)"
- Previous message: Barry Treahy, Jr.: "Re: Needed: Macro Vax Programmer"
- In reply to: Andrew Harrison SUNUK Consultancy: "Re: It is almost certain now, INTEL will have 64bit x86 !!"
- Next in thread: Andrew Harrison SUNUK Consultancy: "Re: It is almost certain now, INTEL will have 64bit x86 !!"
- Reply: Andrew Harrison SUNUK Consultancy: "Re: It is almost certain now, INTEL will have 64bit x86 !!"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Date: Fri, 20 Feb 2004 19:23:00 GMT
On Fri, 20 Feb 2004 11:12:18 +0000, Andrew Harrison SUNUK Consultancy
<Andrew_No.Harrison_No@nospamn.sun.com> wrote:
>Robert Klute wrote:
>> On Thu, 19 Feb 2004 16:59:32 +0000, Andrew Harrison SUNUK Consultancy
>> <Andrew_No.Harrison_No@nospamn.sun.com> wrote:
>> That was long ago and a different generation of Windows.
>>
>NT on Alpha yes, but not Windows 2000 on IBM/Unisys etc
>and their sales have been tiny despite being 100% compatible
>with low end x86 systems.
Different ball park. There only so much you can do, and thus how many
processors are useful, with 3GB of process usable address space.
>> Until someone starts announcing an AMD64 bigger than a 4way, it is moot.
>> Price performance only counts when comparing boxes that deliver the
>> performance you need.
>>
>
>You appear to have missed the Intel announcments, their 64bit
>extensions to x86 are going to be compatible with AMD64 so
>any vendor producing large Intel x86 based servers, for example
>IBM will be producing something that is compatible with AMD64.
No, I didn't miss their announcement. I seem to remember that they are
focusing on 1 - 2 way in the short term with their offering. Still
waiting for proof of an Opteron box bigger than 4 way.
>HP didn't do HP-WW (the original HP name for IPF) because they
>judged that the costs of developing the processors and the
>additional transition costs was too great for HP as a single company
>to bear, subsequent developments have proved that judgment to
>even more acute given the hike in IPF development costs.
Which is why they partnered with Intel.
>> The Linux and Windows market will be driven by performance of the
>> applications that run on it.
>>
>
>But Linux and Windows only really cover the 1-8 way systems market and
>the price performance leaders in that market by a long long way
>for Windows and Linux apps are x86 based systems not IPF systems.
>You will have an uphill struggle to convince customers that they
>should pay 3x the price to get less performance for identical apps
>selected from a smaller application portfolio.
Because you don't get similar performance on many applications unless
you cluster, and clustered solutions are not the solution too often.
I guess, this just means that we can be expecting an announcement from
Sun, any day now, that they are dropping the 15K in favor of V20z
clusters.
Robert Klute,
Who speaks for himself and not the company he works for.
- Next message: dittman_at_dittman.net: "Re: VMS 7.2-2 IDE Boot on AXP164SX (EB164 Variation)"
- Previous message: Barry Treahy, Jr.: "Re: Needed: Macro Vax Programmer"
- In reply to: Andrew Harrison SUNUK Consultancy: "Re: It is almost certain now, INTEL will have 64bit x86 !!"
- Next in thread: Andrew Harrison SUNUK Consultancy: "Re: It is almost certain now, INTEL will have 64bit x86 !!"
- Reply: Andrew Harrison SUNUK Consultancy: "Re: It is almost certain now, INTEL will have 64bit x86 !!"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Relevant Pages
|
