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

AMD planning 45nm 12-Core 'Istanbul' Processor ?



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old April 28th 08, 11:06 AM posted to alt.comp.hardware.amd.x86-64,alt.comp.hardware.overclocking.amd,de.comp.hardware.cpu+mainboard.amd,comp.sys.intel,comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips
Miles Bader
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 30
Default AMD planning 45nm 12-Core 'Istanbul' Processor ?

" writes:
What could be more boring than the x86 domination we have now?
Without AMD, there would be no such monoculture.


Did you mean "without Intel"?


I suppose if AMD hadn't been around, there would have been a greater
chance of Intel getting their butts whipped by some other architecture,
instead of by AMD.

Of course AMD _did_ come up with "x86-64", which is an improvement over
the x86 (obviously even Intel thinks so).

-Miles

--
80% of success is just showing up. --Woody Allen
  #13  
Old April 29th 08, 12:32 AM posted to alt.comp.hardware.amd.x86-64,alt.comp.hardware.overclocking.amd,de.comp.hardware.cpu+mainboard.amd,comp.sys.intel,comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips
Miles Bader[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 96
Default AMD planning 45nm 12-Core 'Istanbul' Processor ?

krw writes:
I suppose if AMD hadn't been around, there would have been a greater
chance of Intel getting their butts whipped by some other architecture,
instead of by AMD.


What architecture? You grossly underestimate the x86 inertia.


"greater chance"

Not necessarily a _good_ chance, but it's the only way I can make sense
of the grandparent poster's ranting...

-Miles

--
x
y
Z!
  #14  
Old April 29th 08, 12:37 AM posted to alt.comp.hardware.amd.x86-64,alt.comp.hardware.overclocking.amd,de.comp.hardware.cpu+mainboard.amd,comp.sys.intel,comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 262
Default AMD planning 45nm 12-Core 'Istanbul' Processor ?

On Tue, 29 Apr 2008 08:32:54 +0900, Miles Bader wrote:

Not necessarily a _good_ chance, but it's the only way I can make sense
of the grandparent poster's ranting...

Don't try to make sense of something containing none of it whatsoever.

NNN

  #16  
Old April 29th 08, 07:57 AM posted to alt.comp.hardware.amd.x86-64,alt.comp.hardware.overclocking.amd,de.comp.hardware.cpu+mainboard.amd,comp.sys.intel,comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips
Wes Newell
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 687
Default AMD planning 45nm 12-Core 'Istanbul' Processor ?

On Mon, 28 Apr 2008 19:18:24 -0400, krw wrote:

In article ,
says...
" writes:
What could be more boring than the x86 domination we have now?
Without AMD, there would be no such monoculture.

Did you mean "without Intel"?


I suppose if AMD hadn't been around, there would have been a greater
chance of Intel getting their butts whipped by some other architecture,
instead of by AMD.


What architecture? You grossly underestimate the x86 inertia.

Of course AMD _did_ come up with "x86-64", which is an improvement over
the x86 (obviously even Intel thinks so).


Intel did too, but had no interest in pushing it forward to product.


Funny, that's not how I recall it. Intel dropped their x86-64 bit plans
after trying to push it onto Microsoft, and Microsoft telling them to
shove off. I think this link will get more to the truth.

http://www.gridtoday.com/03/0929/102028.html


--
Want the ultimate in free OTA SD/HDTV Recorder? http://mythtv.org
My Tivo Experience http://wesnewell.no-ip.com/tivo.htm
Tivo HD/S3 compared http://wesnewell.no-ip.com/mythtivo.htm
AMD cpu help http://wesnewell.no-ip.com/cpu.php
  #18  
Old April 29th 08, 09:41 PM posted to alt.comp.hardware.amd.x86-64,alt.comp.hardware.overclocking.amd,de.comp.hardware.cpu+mainboard.amd,comp.sys.intel,comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips
Scott Lurndal
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 62
Default AMD planning 45nm 12-Core 'Istanbul' Processor ?

Wes Newell writes:
On Mon, 28 Apr 2008 19:18:24 -0400, krw wrote:

In article ,
says...
" writes:
What could be more boring than the x86 domination we have now?
Without AMD, there would be no such monoculture.

Did you mean "without Intel"?

I suppose if AMD hadn't been around, there would have been a greater
chance of Intel getting their butts whipped by some other architecture,
instead of by AMD.


What architecture? You grossly underestimate the x86 inertia.

Of course AMD _did_ come up with "x86-64", which is an improvement over
the x86 (obviously even Intel thinks so).


Intel did too, but had no interest in pushing it forward to product.


Funny, that's not how I recall it. Intel dropped their x86-64 bit plans
after trying to push it onto Microsoft, and Microsoft telling them to
shove off. I think this link will get more to the truth.


From a history perspective, the P7 circa 1996 was to be the 64-bit follow-on
to the ia32 architecture. Then Intel shifted gears and joined with HP
to merge the P7 with some stuff at HP, producing Itanium. Itanium _was_
intel's 64-bit story (with the 32-bit x86 support in the processor). However,
Merced was late and slow and AMD did x86_64 and Intel was forced to include
it.

scott
  #19  
Old April 29th 08, 11:45 PM posted to alt.comp.hardware.amd.x86-64,alt.comp.hardware.overclocking.amd,de.comp.hardware.cpu+mainboard.amd,comp.sys.intel,comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips
krw[_4_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 150
Default AMD planning 45nm 12-Core 'Istanbul' Processor ?

In article KFzRj.12788$Rk6.2453@trnddc07,
says...
On Mon, 28 Apr 2008 19:18:24 -0400, krw wrote:

In article ,
says...
" writes:
What could be more boring than the x86 domination we have now?
Without AMD, there would be no such monoculture.

Did you mean "without Intel"?

I suppose if AMD hadn't been around, there would have been a greater
chance of Intel getting their butts whipped by some other architecture,
instead of by AMD.


What architecture? You grossly underestimate the x86 inertia.

Of course AMD _did_ come up with "x86-64", which is an improvement over
the x86 (obviously even Intel thinks so).


Intel did too, but had no interest in pushing it forward to product.


Funny, that's not how I recall it. Intel dropped their x86-64 bit plans
after trying to push it onto Microsoft, and Microsoft telling them to
shove off. I think this link will get more to the truth.


Only after it was clear that AMD64 was going to happen whatever
Intel did, did Intel try to get in front of the train (to derail
it). M$ didn't see that in their interest either.

http://www.gridtoday.com/03/0929/102028.html



--
Keith
 




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
AMD planning 45nm 12-Core 'Istanbul' Processor ? AirRaid General 115 June 13th 08 04:48 PM
AMD planning 45nm 12-Core 'Istanbul' Processor ? AirRaid Intel 43 May 12th 08 04:31 PM
AMD planning 45nm 12-Core 'Istanbul' Processor ? AirRaid AMD x86-64 Processors 28 May 1st 08 06:14 AM
Is RAM Dedicated by Core in Mutli-Core Processor Systems? JB General 3 August 12th 07 07:36 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:36 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.