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. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
"glen herrmannsfeldt" wrote in message
news:iihEc.130267$HG.98476@attbi_s53... Nate Edel wrote: (snip) The 64-bit war for the desktop is still a non-starter; right you can either get software without consumer hardware (Windows for Itanic) or consumer hardware without a mass-market OS (x86-64). There is Windows (2003 server, I believe) for x86-64. There is even a free 1 year evaluation version available. -- glen Not a released product, just a beta. And it is for AMD64 - apparently it doesn't work with the Intel flavour yet. (lack of IOMMU hardware?) Peter |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
|
#13
|
|||
|
|||
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. -- RusH // http://pulse.pdi.net/~rush/qv30/ Like ninjas, true hackers are shrouded in secrecy and mystery. You may never know -- UNTIL IT'S TOO LATE. |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
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. -- The e-mail address in our reply-to line is reversed in an attempt to minimize spam. Our true address is of the form . |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
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. I'd guess a fair chunk of that is textures, models and the like. Cheers, Rupert |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
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. Its not the code, its data. Pozdrawiam. -- RusH // http://pulse.pdi.net/~rush/qv30/ Like ninjas, true hackers are shrouded in secrecy and mystery. You may never know -- UNTIL IT'S TOO LATE. |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
Warren Spencer wrote:
Perhaps this is the first case of a processor acting as a catalyst: The Itanium sparked the 64-bit-for-consumer trend, but isn't actually going to take part in it ;-) Interesting way of looking at it, I'll admit. Yousuf Khan |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
Nate Edel wrote:
Well, you can kinda-sorta get the OS on the G5, as others have noted. And Apple, while consumer hardware, is only kinda-sorta in the mass-market game. Even within the Apple market, are the G5s down throughout the line yet, or are they just the top-end model? Does AIX which runs on Power4 chips work on the G5? Yousuf Khan |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
RusH wrote:
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. Its not the code, its data. Precisely. Pozdrawiam. -- The e-mail address in our reply-to line is reversed in an attempt to minimize spam. Our true address is of the form . |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
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 |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
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 07:02 PM |
Itanium performance | [email protected] | General | 2 | November 4th 03 06:16 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 |