A computer components & hardware forum. HardwareBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » HardwareBanter forum » Processors » General
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Is Itanium the first 64-bit casualty?



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21  
Old June 30th 04, 07:26 AM
CJT
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Tony Hill wrote:
On Tue, 29 Jun 2004 19:52:23 GMT, CJT wrote:

RusH wrote:


CJT wrote :



64 bit really isn't useful for typical (or even most atypical)
desktops, anyway.


UT2003 has 2GB of stuff on disk it uses for rendering
Next UT engine will use 2GB of stuff in RAM for the rendering, they
are waiting for a 64bit platform in the mean time becouse Windows as it
is sucks above 2GB (unusable).


Pozdrawiam.


I suppose if you write bad enough code, you need that much linear
memory for essentially parallel tasks. But typical applications
don't.



Not bad code, just LOTS of graphics. Eye candy and graphics seems to
be what sells in video games for the most part, so I expect that we'll
see the data set for games continue to expand at a rather prodigious
rate.

-------------
Tony Hill
hilla underscore 20 at yahoo dot ca


Sure, but that stuff doesn't need a linear address space. Segments
work just fine.

--
The e-mail address in our reply-to line is reversed in an attempt to
minimize spam. Our true address is of the form .
  #22  
Old June 30th 04, 08:59 AM
Jan-Frode Myklebust
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On 2004-06-30, Yousuf Khan wrote:

Does AIX which runs on Power4 chips work on the G5?


Not yet, but IBM plans to support AIX on the BladeCenter JS20 (ppc970) in
the third quarter of 2004. Don't know if that means it will run on
apple/non-ibm machines..



-jf
  #23  
Old June 30th 04, 10:47 AM
Maynard Handley
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

In article , CJT
wrote:

RusH wrote:

CJT wrote :


64 bit really isn't useful for typical (or even most atypical)
desktops, anyway.



UT2003 has 2GB of stuff on disk it uses for rendering
Next UT engine will use 2GB of stuff in RAM for the rendering, they
are waiting for a 64bit platform in the mean time becouse Windows as it
is sucks above 2GB (unusable).


Pozdrawiam.


I suppose if you write bad enough code, you need that much linear
memory for essentially parallel tasks. But typical applications
don't.


Translation. I know buggerall about what anyone else in the computer
world does, but I have an opinion on it anyway.

Maynard
  #24  
Old June 30th 04, 11:53 AM
George Macdonald
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Wed, 30 Jun 2004 06:26:07 GMT, CJT wrote:

Tony Hill wrote:
On Tue, 29 Jun 2004 19:52:23 GMT, CJT wrote:

RusH wrote:


CJT wrote :



64 bit really isn't useful for typical (or even most atypical)
desktops, anyway.


UT2003 has 2GB of stuff on disk it uses for rendering
Next UT engine will use 2GB of stuff in RAM for the rendering, they
are waiting for a 64bit platform in the mean time becouse Windows as it
is sucks above 2GB (unusable).


Pozdrawiam.

I suppose if you write bad enough code, you need that much linear
memory for essentially parallel tasks. But typical applications
don't.



Not bad code, just LOTS of graphics. Eye candy and graphics seems to
be what sells in video games for the most part, so I expect that we'll
see the data set for games continue to expand at a rather prodigious
rate.

-------------
Tony Hill
hilla underscore 20 at yahoo dot ca


Sure, but that stuff doesn't need a linear address space. Segments
work just fine.


What segments? That was hashed to death here recently - segments don't
work for extending the address space in any practical fashion... unless you
mean PAEcoughsplutter, which is more trouble than recompiling for
64-bit mode. Cheaper to just get a x86-64 CPU and recompile.

BTW there's more to x86-64 than 64-bit addressing which we want: 16 general
registers and 16 FP registers with direct look-up... i.e. lose that ****in'
stack.

Rgds, George Macdonald

"Just because they're paranoid doesn't mean you're not psychotic" - Who, me??
  #26  
Old June 30th 04, 03:33 PM
Rupert Pigott
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Warren Spencer wrote:
(Yousuf Khan) wrote in
om:


Interesting reading here, and very common-sense. Itanium may be the next
casualty in the 64-bit wars, when Itanium was the one that caused the
64-bit wars to start in the first place.

http://www.infoworld.com/article/04/...nterwin_1.html

Yousuf Khan



Perhaps this is the first case of a processor acting as a catalyst: The


No, quite definitely not the first. Plenty of architectures out there
that died a quiet death and were resurrected in another form for other
markets.

Itanium sparked the 64-bit-for-consumer trend, but isn't actually going to
take part in it ;-)


Much as I hate to say it : I think the Alpha did, NT was first ported
the Alpha/MIPS/PowerPC. IA-64 came much later. In practice I only saw
NT on Alpha actually in production, which is why I didn't say MIPS. :/

Worth noting that DEC did initially point Alpha at Embedded and low
end workstation space, and they continued their spasmodic efforts to
push it at the desktop for a long time.

Alpha appears to have had quite a large "Open Source" user base for a
long time, but that doesn't really count as consumer. However a lot of
that 64bit clean push was accomplished with Alphas, and that lowered
the barrier of entry for vendors of 64bit gear.

Cheers,
Rupert

  #27  
Old June 30th 04, 05:00 PM
Dan Pop
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

In Rupert Pigott writes:

Worth noting that DEC did initially point Alpha at Embedded and low
end workstation space, and they continued their spasmodic efforts to
push it at the desktop for a long time.


Care to elaborate on the difference between "low end workstation" and
"desktop"? Since 1994, all low end Alpha workstations have actually been
PCs with an Alpha processor instead of an Intel processor. What can be
more "desktop" than such a system?

Alpha appears to have had quite a large "Open Source" user base for a
long time, but that doesn't really count as consumer. However a lot of
that 64bit clean push was accomplished with Alphas, and that lowered
the barrier of entry for vendors of 64bit gear.


This is true. DEC OSF/1 exposed plenty of open source code that wasn't
64-bit clean. Plenty of proprietary code, too, which severely restricted
the number of commercial applications available for that platform, during
the first years.

Dan
--
Dan Pop
DESY Zeuthen, RZ group
Email:
  #28  
Old June 30th 04, 06:41 PM
Tony Hill
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Wed, 30 Jun 2004 06:26:07 GMT, CJT wrote:
Tony Hill wrote:
On Tue, 29 Jun 2004 19:52:23 GMT, CJT wrote:
I suppose if you write bad enough code, you need that much linear
memory for essentially parallel tasks. But typical applications
don't.



Not bad code, just LOTS of graphics. Eye candy and graphics seems to
be what sells in video games for the most part, so I expect that we'll
see the data set for games continue to expand at a rather prodigious
rate.


Sure, but that stuff doesn't need a linear address space. Segments
work just fine.


Segments? Ya mean like PAE?!?! Not a chance in hell! Do this the
*RIGHT* way, ie 64-bit flat linear address space, not some
ugly-as-all-hell kludge!

64-bit may not be NEEDED to get more than 2GB (3GB in some cases) of
memory space, but it's the RIGHT way to do it. All the other
solutions are way more trouble than their worth.

-------------
Tony Hill
hilla underscore 20 at yahoo dot ca
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
HP's Q&A about OpenVMS, x86-64, and Itanium Yousuf Khan General 36 June 28th 04 12:25 PM
Itanium Experts - Building Itanium 1 systems (parts)? Matt Simis General 1 December 18th 03 08:02 PM
Itanium performance [email protected] General 2 November 4th 03 07:16 AM
Supercomputer interconnect technologies, Opteron & Itanium Yousuf Khan General 4 August 29th 03 12:47 PM
Chess software benchmarks for Itanium and Opteron? totojepast General 0 June 23rd 03 08:39 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 06:27 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 HardwareBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.