Interesting read about upcoming K9 processors

  • Thread starter Thread starter Yousuf Khan
  • Start date Start date
I thought the point was getting a working 64-bit Microsoft system? That
would mean not just the OS, but also the apps and drivers. If it's just the
OS, then Microsoft is already done, the OS is already ready for Opteron. But
Microsoft has said that the only thing holding them back from releasing the
OS is the drivers, and a few apps which might do things and get away with in
the 32-bit OS which they won't be allowed to get away with in 64-bit.

Yousuf Khan
Click to expand...

It's those darn AOL 64 drivers holding everything up!!! ;P ;P

Hey, is Windows "Longhorn" gonna be for x86-64 CPU?
Ed
 
Yousuf Khan said:
I thought the point was getting a working 64-bit Microsoft system? That
would mean not just the OS, but also the apps and drivers. If it's just the
OS, then Microsoft is already done, the OS is already ready for Opteron. But
Microsoft has said that the only thing holding them back from releasing the
OS is the drivers, and a few apps which might do things and get away with in
the 32-bit OS which they won't be allowed to get away with in 64-bit.
Click to expand...

Doesn't Advanced Server 2003 do 64-bit? As in Itanium?
 
Judd said:
Doesn't Advanced Server 2003 do 64-bit? As in Itanium?
Click to expand...

Of course. But, it isn't a 'desktop OS' and many people don't count
anything Itanium as being real... that gives it two strikes. Since it
doesn't run on Opteron, that makes three. ;-).

Regards,
Dean
 
Yousuf Khan said:
I thought the point was getting a working 64-bit Microsoft system?
Click to expand...

Then you failed to pay attention to the context you were responding to.

- bill
 
Ed said:
Hey, is Windows "Longhorn" gonna be for x86-64 CPU?
Ed
Click to expand...

Current rumours are that, that's all it's going to be for. You won't be able
to run it on anything less than a 64-bit machine.

Yousuf Khan
 
Judd said:
Doesn't Advanced Server 2003 do 64-bit? As in Itanium?
Click to expand...

The number of apps and the number of drivers supported on Opteron is
supposed to be much higher than on Itanium.

Yousuf Khan
 
Bill Todd said:
Since Windows XP code is largely Win2K code underneath, and since 64-bit
Win2K was developed on Alpha, a large percentage of the 64-bit code in
current 64-bit Windows products almost certainly originated with the 64-bit
Alpha version.
Click to expand...

One would in fact presume that the 32 and 64-bit code bases are now
essentially identical.
 
David Gay said:
One would in fact presume that the 32 and 64-bit code bases are now
essentially identical.
Click to expand...

IIRC that was significantly the case (and definitely the goal) back in 1999.
Yet another reason to doubt that very much code was changed in the
transition to Itanic.

- bill
 
George Macdonald said:
George said:
[SNIP]
Click to expand...

True but those people are among the most arrogant on the planet. They
think they can get away with it and maybe they can. There are signs that
AMD64 supply is tightening up and prices are staying relatively high. It's
probable that the bottom line is that M$ figures AMD64 volume can never
reach what they call "volume".
Click to expand...

Interesting, because I was just reading an article from yesterday saying AMD
just dropped the price of the A64 by up to 30% (depending on the model).

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2004/07/26/amd_prices/
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
Yousuf Khan said:
The number of apps and the number of drivers supported on Opteron is
supposed to be much higher than on Itanium.
Click to expand...

Huh? If Windows Server 2003 is running and selling for Itanium, then it
probably has the drivers for the architecture and applications as well. If
you mean 3rd party, then that's a different issue altogether but I'm sure
3rd party high end server vendors do have the drivers. Intel site has a
long list of apps that run on Itanium. Itanium also runs 32-bit software,
but only like a mid level P4.
 
Dean Kent said:
Of course. But, it isn't a 'desktop OS' and many people don't count
anything Itanium as being real... that gives it two strikes. Since it
doesn't run on Opteron, that makes three. ;-).
Click to expand...

LOL, I suppose!
 
Judd said:
Huh? If Windows Server 2003 is running and selling for Itanium, then
it probably has the drivers for the architecture and applications as
well. If you mean 3rd party, then that's a different issue
altogether but I'm sure 3rd party high end server vendors do have the
drivers. Intel site has a long list of apps that run on Itanium.
Itanium also runs 32-bit software, but only like a mid level P4.
Click to expand...

Yeah, it's the 3rd party stuff I'm talking about. Opterons are supposed to
run with a wider range of 3rd party devices than Itaniums. Because they are
aimed at such a cost-sensitive sector of the market, you got to expect that
people will try to put their own devices into these systems rather than pay
the exhorbitant vendor prices. Of course when they do that, they also miss
out on all of the vendor pre-testing that goes along with it.

Yousuf Khan
 
As always, AMD is good and Intel is bad. Same old spiel. YAWN!
Click to expand...

Sure, when Intel tries to twist the market (i.e. consumer) to their
benefit and there is an alternative with a consumer-friendly alternative,
you bet Intel is *BAD*! To think otherwise is simply stupid. Unless of
"Course"...

BTW, top-posters suck!
 
Are we still supposed to be excited about a 64-bit desktop OS from MS after
all these years? I heard once it was going to be a slam dunk. Guess
not... :-)
Click to expand...

A 64bit OS is a slam dunk, though perhaps not from Micro$hit.
Perhaps politics is involved here? Nah Dean, couldn't be!

BTW, 64bit Linux works fine here! It seems Sun is found the light too.
OTOH, Itanic well never see the light, no matter how hard the pundits push.
 
Keith said:
On Mon, 26 Jul 2004 04:47:58 +0000, Dean Kent wrote:


A 64bit OS is a slam dunk, though perhaps not from Micro$hit.
Perhaps politics is involved here? Nah Dean, couldn't be!
Click to expand...

I don't think so. More likely Windows is a nightmare to code/modify. Some
people like conspiracy theories, however. :-).
BTW, 64bit Linux works fine here! It seems Sun is found the light too.
Click to expand...

Linux isn't Windows, and therefore is a completely different argument. Sun
found religion for the same reason most others do... impending death! said:
OTOH, Itanic well never see the light, no matter how hard the pundits
Click to expand...
push.

Unlike Power, which will dominate everywhere, right? No politics here!!!
;-).

Regards,
Dean
 
Keith said:
BTW, 64bit Linux works fine here! It seems Sun is found the light
too. OTOH, Itanic well never see the light, no matter how hard the
pundits push.
Click to expand...

It would be supremely embarrassing to Microsoft if Sun gets Solaris for
Opteron out before Windows.

Yousuf Khan
 
Yousuf Khan said:
It would be supremely embarrassing to Microsoft if Sun gets Solaris for
Opteron out before Windows.
Click to expand...

My money is on embarassement...

Regards,
Dean
 
Joe said:
Going to 64 bits will be trivial compared to going to 64 way for Microsoft.
Click to expand...

Yes, since Linux is already NUMA capable 64 CPU is a configuration
option. Still, finding the bandwidth to feed those CPUs is easier if
they have some dedicated RAM (read as: Opteron).
 
Pleasant said:
why do you say that? Maybe there will be particular issues for
applications to make use of all those CPUs but I don't see why it would
be such a big deal for the OS kernel scheduler.
Click to expand...

You don't understand the problem... the o/s needs to make all sorts of
decisions about moving a process to another processor to load balance
vs. cost of moving, etc. It is a nasty problem!
 
Back
Top