Did Intel cancel their 64-bit desktop line?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Rock
  • Start date Start date
R

Rock

I heard a rumor that Intel cancelled their 64-bit desktop line and
that the market is left open to AMD. I think Intel may want to focus
on server market. Any official "news"?

Rock
 
Rock said:
I heard a rumor that Intel cancelled their 64-bit desktop line and
Click to expand...

The rumor was mangled by the time it hit your ears. HP has
discontinued their workstation/desktop _ia64_ EPIC processor line.

Through the magic of extensive cross-licensing agreements, Intel
is providing 64-bit support on the latest XEON line which is
compatible with AMD's long mode.

Intel will continue to produce 64-bit processors in both the
ia32 (EM64T) and ia64 lines for the immediate future. Down the
road, the ia64 may demise quietly.
 
Hp's cancellation of the itanium desktop line was last sept,as I
remember. Could be wrong.

No, I think this is new news, it seems the 64-bit drivers suck for
windows, and the dual core takes old drivers, and MS has pulled back
on its promise to "deliver a 64-bit windows xp within a month" of IDF.

And I think the PC Mag's test shows the dual-core Intel is at least
equivalent to the AMD64 bit (maybe it falls down in one category, I'm
not sure I remember correctly).

Maybe Xeon is compatible with AMD64, but I don't think it's
"equivalent" at least in performance, but the dual-core seems it is.
I dunno how the price compares, but Intel can decide to sell the CPU
for whatever they want.

Doesn't em64t run 32-bit drivers? I would expect MS would switch back
to 32-bit mode to talk to hardware, the way we used to switch into and
out of protected mode. Kind of makes the 64-bit drivers unnecessary.
Except for AMD support.

Rock
 
Rock said:
Hp's cancellation of the itanium desktop line was last sept,as I
remember. Could be wrong.

No, I think this is new news, it seems the 64-bit drivers suck for
windows, and the dual core takes old drivers, and MS has pulled back
on its promise to "deliver a 64-bit windows xp within a month" of IDF
Click to expand...

Windows isn't the primary driver for 64-bit. Frankly, most people could
care less if windows were 32-bit or 64-bit. 64-bit matters for people
who want large memory and demanding applications - hardly the
windows space. 64-bit really doesn't provide the average windows user
with any benefit.

Linux is the preferred 64-bit ia32 architecture OS at this point in
time and it is growing pretty rapidly.
And I think the PC Mag's test shows the dual-core Intel is at least
equivalent to the AMD64 bit (maybe it falls down in one category, I'm
not sure I remember correctly).
Click to expand...

dual-core is orthogonal to 64-bit support. AMD has announced dual
core too.
Maybe Xeon is compatible with AMD64, but I don't think it's
Click to expand...

There is no maybe about the compatibility insofar as the 64-bit
architectural features are concerned. Some os bits may be slightly
different in the model-specific register space, but from an application
level, they are _identical_.
"equivalent" at least in performance, but the dual-core seems it is.
I dunno how the price compares, but Intel can decide to sell the CPU
for whatever they want.
Click to expand...

As can AMD with their dual-core opterons.
Doesn't em64t run 32-bit drivers? I would expect MS would switch back
to 32-bit mode to talk to hardware, the way we used to switch into and
out of protected mode. Kind of makes the 64-bit drivers unnecessary.
Click to expand...

em64t is no different architecturally than AMD64. The requirement for
32-bit vs. 64-bit drivers is an _operating system_ requirement, not a
hardware requirement, particularly since address spaces larger than
32-bits have been supported for a long time with PAE mode, and operating
systems have needed to support driver access (either directly or through
bounce-buffers) to extended memory > 4GB.

scott
 
Rock said:
Hp's cancellation of the itanium desktop line was last sept,as I
remember. Could be wrong.

No, I think this is new news, it seems the 64-bit drivers suck for
windows, and the dual core takes old drivers, and MS has pulled back
on its promise to "deliver a 64-bit windows xp within a month" of
Click to expand...
IDF.

Not that I've heard about. I do follow the news pretty closely. I get
alerts and stuff, but so far nothing about MS delaying Windows x64 some
more.

Doesn't em64t run 32-bit drivers? I would expect MS would switch back
to 32-bit mode to talk to hardware, the way we used to switch into and
out of protected mode. Kind of makes the 64-bit drivers unnecessary.
Except for AMD support.
Click to expand...

Microsoft made a conscious decision not to support 32-bit drivers in
their 64-bit OS. So they created no thunking layer for 32-bit drivers,
like there is for 32-bit apps. If they allowed it, then it would take
years for 64-bit drivers to arrive.

Yousuf Khan
 
There is no maybe about the compatibility insofar as the 64-bit
architectural features are concerned. Some os bits may be slightly
different in the model-specific register space, but from an application
level, they are _identical_.
Click to expand...

Not absolutely (just close enough as makes no difference :-). Some of the
intel specific SSE3 (or are they up to SSE4 or 5 now?) instructions don't
exist on the amd, and the amd 3dNow! instructions don't exist on the intel,
and of course, the cpuid instruction returns different info :-), but mostly
you can't tell the difference.

Actually the best way to tell the difference is that if it runs twice
as fast, its an amd chip :-).
--email: (e-mail address removed) icbm: Delray Beach, FL |
<URL:http://home.att.net/~Tom.Horsley> Free Software and Politics <<==+
 
Back
Top