Sorry about the tone of my initial post, but when people take a superior attitude, I sometimes get ticked off, and I take a superior attitude (as far as I am able) in turn.
Originally posted by: Aenslead
Well,
KF we can quite easily see your appreciation for English journalism, and for the same matter, doubt then you have been reading it as of late...
Secondly, just to correct your mistake. You said:
"Beside needing a different motherboard, Athlon 64s will need a new OS to use its 64-ness, and it is still not clear if MS is going to offer a Home version any time soon."
That's a negative: see, AMD64 is compatible, as it name implies, with 64bit software, but still able to process any 32-bit code, hence, any, and I mean ANY current software, therefor, you will be able to still use any version existing version of Windows-
If you read the Inquirer on a daily baisis, you should know this.
So what is the mistake, Aenslead? Maybe it is because you are "challenged" by technical info, while having an exceptional appreciation of humor, that you think that malodorous pile of execration is worth frequenting.
I don't know if you got the wrong idea from the Inquirer, so I'll spell it out. You let me know where you think it's wrong:
With present 32bit OSes (such as the released Windows XP Home), you cannot ever run a single new 64 bit instruction at any time under any circumstance. You cannot use any of the new 64 bit registers, any of the added registers, or the direct 64 bit addressing. Why? Before you can get at these things, the OS first has to run in a new mode, unique to AMD's Hammer series. To do so, the OS has to be completely revised, because the Athlon 64, when in the new 64 bit mode, always uses flat 64 bit addressing in ring 0, (where the OS operates), and cannot use the selector system that is now used. Since memory management is one of the primary tasks of the OS, and something which it is constantly doing, this is not a trivial re-write. Drivers will probably need to be rewritten for the new OS too, although maybe there is some way MS can make the old drivers work. Rewriting a driver is not a trivial task. It is not likely that many manufacturers will do so, and it is almost garanteed that they won't for products they no longer make. That means running the new 64 bit OS will not be easy, or it might not be, depending on what can be done about the drivers.
Now if you had been reading this forum regularly, you might have seen this before.
What aspect of 64bit-ness is the Inquirer claiming is available in MS XP Home? How about a link to one of those super-duper Inquirer blurbs that explains it?
IAC, if some company writes a 64 bit game taking advantage of the Athlon 64s new features, you will not be able to run it in 64 bit mode, even if you have an Athlon 64, unless you get a new OS.
BTW, current processors from Intel and AMD can address beyond the 32 bit address space (32 bits = 4 Gbytes), provided the OS uses a certain mode for selectors, but only indirectly. You can select a particular 4G segment by using selectors, and address within that segment. In the new AMD scheme, a 64 bit address space is always directly addressable.
You can be sure that however successful the Athlon 64 is, Intel will never go along with AMD. Marketing would never permit it. It would be like admitting AMD was worthy of respect. If Intel puts out a 64bit processor besides Itanium, they will do it differently than AMD. It is not a question of patents or copyrights. Instruction sets are not protected under any law.