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 » Intel
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

New Itanium info



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old February 25th 11, 04:13 PM posted to comp.sys.intel
Bill Davidsen
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 245
Default New Itanium info

Some new Itanium info is out, http://goo.gl/vBg63 gives details on the eight
core 32nm version of the chip just announced.
  #2  
Old March 5th 11, 12:03 AM posted to comp.sys.intel
Robert Myers
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 606
Default New Itanium info

On Feb 25, 10:13*am, Bill Davidsen wrote:
Some new Itanium info is out,http://goo.gl/vBg63gives details on the eight
core 32nm version of the chip just announced.


That is by far the most optimistic take on the new Itanium I've read
so far.

The article implies that a key obstacle to adoption of the chip is
software optimization. That may be a formally correct statement, but
the possibility of routinely producing good code for this chip at any
plausible cost seems to be a pipe dream, even if Intel could jigger
its compiler to produce could spec numbers.

If this chip really were socket-compatible with QPI Xeon's, that could
be a game-changer, but I haven't seen language that seems sufficiently
specific to draw conclusions.

Robert.
  #3  
Old March 5th 11, 12:54 AM posted to comp.sys.intel
daytripper
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 265
Default New Itanium info

On Fri, 4 Mar 2011 15:03:54 -0800 (PST), Robert Myers
wrote:
[...]
If this chip really were socket-compatible with QPI Xeon's, that could
be a game-changer, but I haven't seen language that seems sufficiently
specific to draw conclusions.


I'm curious how you came to your "could be a game-changer" conclusion. By all
appearances, it's the architecture and the mountain of baggage it brings that
has been pretty soundly rejected by all but a very few. Hardware
implementation details seem to be well below the noise floor wrt
significance...

Cheers
  #4  
Old March 5th 11, 02:56 AM posted to comp.sys.intel
Robert Myers
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 606
Default New Itanium info

On Mar 4, 6:54*pm, daytripper wrote:
On Fri, 4 Mar 2011 15:03:54 -0800 (PST), Robert Myers
wrote:
[...]

If this chip really were socket-compatible with QPI Xeon's, that could
be a game-changer, but I haven't seen language that seems sufficiently
specific to draw conclusions.


I'm curious how you came to your "could be a game-changer" conclusion. By all
appearances, it's the architecture and the mountain of baggage it brings that
has been pretty soundly rejected by all but a very few. Hardware
implementation details seem to be well below the noise floor wrt
significance...


People have x86 software and they have enterprise software.

If you're IBM, you satisfy that need by selling expensive plugins that
allow you to include PC-compatible chips into your, um, mainframe
installation.

If you're HP, potentially you say, here's you box. Run whatever you
like.

Robert.

  #5  
Old March 5th 11, 04:23 AM posted to comp.sys.intel
daytripper
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 265
Default New Itanium info

On Fri, 4 Mar 2011 17:56:41 -0800 (PST), Robert Myers
wrote:

On Mar 4, 6:54*pm, daytripper wrote:
On Fri, 4 Mar 2011 15:03:54 -0800 (PST), Robert Myers
wrote:
[...]

If this chip really were socket-compatible with QPI Xeon's, that could
be a game-changer, but I haven't seen language that seems sufficiently
specific to draw conclusions.


I'm curious how you came to your "could be a game-changer" conclusion. By all
appearances, it's the architecture and the mountain of baggage it brings that
has been pretty soundly rejected by all but a very few. Hardware
implementation details seem to be well below the noise floor wrt
significance...


People have x86 software and they have enterprise software.

If you're IBM, you satisfy that need by selling expensive plugins that
allow you to include PC-compatible chips into your, um, mainframe
installation.

If you're HP, potentially you say, here's you box. Run whatever you
like.

Robert.


Ok, I got you. And that's a concept that has been pitched often - usually as a
bridge solution - but actual implementations have been rare to say the least.
And not to beat on the recently deceased, but if dual-architecture ability was
a sought-after feature, Advanced Modular Solutions might still be around...

Cheers
  #6  
Old March 5th 11, 04:39 AM posted to comp.sys.intel
Robert Myers
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 606
Default New Itanium info

On Mar 4, 10:23*pm, daytripper wrote:


Ok, I got you. And that's a concept that has been pitched often - usually as a
bridge solution - but actual implementations have been rare to say the least.
And not to beat on the recently deceased, but if dual-architecture ability was
a sought-after feature, Advanced Modular Solutions might still be around....


If I were HP, I'd be hanging onto that for dear life. There isn't
much else to sell.

Robert.

 




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
z/OS and Itanium Robert Myers Intel 1 January 25th 07 11:26 PM
CPU Info? Itanium..... Suzanne Intel 1 August 29th 06 11:15 PM
We NEED an Itanium 3! John Savard Intel 15 April 7th 04 01:15 PM
Itanium experts- Building Itanium 1 systems from old parts Matt Simis Intel 5 December 20th 03 03:41 PM
Itanium Experts - Building Itanium 1 systems (parts)? Matt Simis General 1 December 18th 03 08:02 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 06:16 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.