Athlon64 is still the ONLY x64 processor!!!!

[Icepick]

I'm not making this up. It's right up on the front page of (arguably) the most respected tech website in the world!

/Rant
I'm sure I'm not the only one to notice this but I think it's funny enough to quickly comment about it. They're still running those Zipzoomfly ads for the Athlon64 3000+ that state, "The ONLY Microsoft Windows compatible 64-bit processor."

Whatever happened to truth in advertising? I think AMD is great and all but... HELLO! Intel has had 64-bit CPUs on the market in the form of the 6xx series since quarter 1 '05.

http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2353&p=1

I understand that these ads are what make the site available to us for free but, come on! Let's at least keep the retailers honest. /EndRant

Just an observation. Ok. Time to go back to reading the great X-Box article!

 

[fbrdphreak]

Dude....its an ad.....the AT editors have no control over them. Their advertising dept is ENTIRELY separate from the editors.

Moving on...

 

[Ricemarine]

We'll in reality, we aren't really using 64-bit processors...
For then we wouldn't be able to run 32-bit apps period.

 

[Icepick]

yeah I know they aren't really responsible. Just thought it was funny that it's out there none the less. It's still a slap in the face to the competitors

 

[fbrdphreak]

Originally posted by: Ricemarine
We'll in reality, we aren't really using 64-bit processors...
For then we wouldn't be able to run 32-bit apps period.

We'll in reality, we are really using 64-bit processors. A64's are just able to "emulate" 32-bit mode and I believe, just use 32 bits of the registers.

 

[the Chase]

On a related note-Im happy with my A64's performance and everything, but are we ever going to see 64-bit programs out? Is it going to take everyone switching to Vista before this finally happens?

 

[Markbnj]

We'll in reality, we are really using 64-bit processors. A64's are just able to "emulate" 32-bit mode and I believe, just use 32 bits of the registers.

I guess emulation is probably the right word for it, or you might say that the chips maintain backward compatibility with the registers and memory by providing address and data pathways at multiple bit-widths. There is a great article on extending the x86 32-bit architecture to 64 bits here.

Back when 16 bit processors were the norm the main registers, such as the arithmetic accumulators like AX and BX, and the address registers ES, DS, etc., were all 16 bits wide. When this architecture was extended to 32 bits the registers got new names, i.e. EAX, EBX, EDS, etc. An instruction like "MOV ESX, AX" referenced the 16 bit register set, and "SUM EAX, EBX" referenced the 32-bit set. You could even reference the same register both ways, i.e. "MOV AX, ESX", "SUM EAX, EBX". You just had to know what was in the other word that wasn't referenced by the 16 bit instruction.

The move to 64 bits on the AMD architecture is not quite as seemless, because programs have to execute a prefix instruction which turns on 64 bit extensions. Then the registers take on names like RAX, RBX, RCX, etc.

The bottom line is that the x86 architecture has always maintained bit-width backward compatibility by maintaining the address and data pathways needed for the old software.

 

[slash196]

Originally posted by: the Chase
On a related note-Im happy with my A64's performance and everything, but are we ever going to see 64-bit programs out? Is it going to take everyone switching to Vista before this finally happens?

I'll be the first to admit my knowledge on this front is EXTREMELY limited, but I'm of the understanding that 64-bit programs have to have a 64-bit operating system.

 

[Icepick]

Originally posted by: slash196

Originally posted by: the Chase
On a related note-Im happy with my A64's performance and everything, but are we ever going to see 64-bit programs out? Is it going to take everyone switching to Vista before this finally happens?

I'll be the first to admit my knowledge on this front is EXTREMELY limited, but I'm of the understanding that 64-bit programs have to have a 64-bit operating system.

This is not a problem since Windows XP64 has been available to the public in retail since June.

 

[fbrdphreak]

64-bit programs will not be prevalent until a 64-bit OS is the primary choice for users, or at least holds a decent market share. Right now XP64 has limited driver support, limited app support, and a limited user base. This will not change MUCH with Vista 64-bit, but it will get better. I'd bet we don't see mainstream 64-bit apps widely available until post Vista.

 

[icarus4586]

On a related note-Im happy with my A64's performance and everything, but are we ever going to see 64-bit programs out? Is it going to take everyone switching to Vista before this finally happens?

There are a few win64 programs out, mostly open source. More than likely we won't see too many until after Vista is out though.

 

[the Chase]

Thnx guys- figured as much- I got the free trial version of XP64(6 month version) and I'm itching to "fire it up" but am hoping some more 64bit games/apps come out before I start the clock a'tickin.

Edit- on a moral note- yeah the ad should be modified.

 

[icarus4586]

Just last weekend I installed XP Pro x64. I got it through a volume license my university has with MS.
Anyway, the main reason that I switched was because it had been about a year and a half since I last wiped my HDD and things were getting a bit clunky. I had the 64 bit version right there, so I figured, "eh, why not?" It was a little bit more of a pain to find drivers, but not as bad as I thought it would be. Certainly better than my AMD64 Linux success. As far as performance, it might be better. I think the main thing contributing to better performance is just that it's a clean install. From what I've read, you'll gain maybe 5-10% performance. The reason for this is that programs have access to 16 GPRs in AMD64 as opposed to 8 in i386.
The main benefit to switching will be for server admins and like, systems that will really be able to use the extra memory that a 64 bit CPU can address.

 

[TGS]

Originally posted by: icepik

Originally posted by: slash196

Originally posted by: the Chase
On a related note-Im happy with my A64's performance and everything, but are we ever going to see 64-bit programs out? Is it going to take everyone switching to Vista before this finally happens?

I'll be the first to admit my knowledge on this front is EXTREMELY limited, but I'm of the understanding that 64-bit programs have to have a 64-bit operating system.

This is not a problem since Windows XP64 has been available to the public in retail since June.

Or the myriad of 64 Bit OSes before that... This is just like the Microsoft "Get the Truth" ads that popped up on Linux sites. The aren't monitoring what advertisers put up in the adspace.

 

[Ricemarine]

Originally posted by: fbrdphreak

Originally posted by: Ricemarine
We'll in reality, we aren't really using 64-bit processors...
For then we wouldn't be able to run 32-bit apps period.

We'll in reality, we are really using 64-bit processors. A64's are just able to "emulate" 32-bit mode and I believe, just use 32 bits of the registers.

Only the Itanium core by Intel is the pure 64-bit processor.

Amd 64 is just a 32 bit processor with extended memory technology so that it can be extended to support 64-bit applications.

 

[supasso]

Originally posted by: Ricemarine

Originally posted by: fbrdphreak

Originally posted by: Ricemarine
We'll in reality, we aren't really using 64-bit processors...
For then we wouldn't be able to run 32-bit apps period.

We'll in reality, we are really using 64-bit processors. A64's are just able to "emulate" 32-bit mode and I believe, just use 32 bits of the registers.

Only the Itanium core by Intel is the pure 64-bit processor.

Amd 64 is just a 32 bit processor with extended memory technology so that it can be extended to support 64-bit applications.

Not again. That's just plain wrong. It's a true 64-bit processor based on x86-64 ISA, which is an extension of the 32-bit ISA, x86. You are confusing the hardware with the Instruction Set Architecture.

 

[Brunnis]

Originally posted by: Ricemarine
Only the Itanium core by Intel is the pure 64-bit processor.

Amd 64 is just a 32 bit processor with extended memory technology so that it can be extended to support 64-bit applications.

Using the very same logic, the 32-bit CPUs we've using the past 15+ years are nothing more than 16-bit CPUs like the 8086.

As was said by supasso, you shouldn't confuse the hardware with the ISA. Sure, x86 has been extended, but that's just to take advantage of the new 64-bit hardware. Nothing about that makes it less "true" 64-bit.

 

[F1shF4t]

Originally posted by: Ricemarine

Originally posted by: fbrdphreak

Originally posted by: Ricemarine
We'll in reality, we aren't really using 64-bit processors...
For then we wouldn't be able to run 32-bit apps period.

We'll in reality, we are really using 64-bit processors. A64's are just able to "emulate" 32-bit mode and I believe, just use 32 bits of the registers.

Only the Itanium core by Intel is the pure 64-bit processor.

Amd 64 is just a 32 bit processor with extended memory technology so that it can be extended to support 64-bit applications.

Its not the memory technology which allows u to run 64bit applications, its the internal register size. The effect that this has on memory is that now the cpus can process 64bit locations meaning u can address more memory.

For athlon 64 (or the 64bit pentiums) u can call it as much a 64bit processor as 32bit or 16bit, doesnt matter, what matters is that the cpu CAN execute all this code without emulation of some sort. (in 32 bit only half of the register sizes used etc)

 

[imported_michaelpatrick33]

Originally posted by: fbrdphreak

Originally posted by: Ricemarine
We'll in reality, we aren't really using 64-bit processors...
For then we wouldn't be able to run 32-bit apps period.

We'll in reality, we are really using 64-bit processors. A64's are just able to "emulate" 32-bit mode and I believe, just use 32 bits of the registers.

That is incorrect. There is no emulation of 32bit code. It is a full 32bit processor with X86-64 extensions (and 8 additional GPR's when in 64bit Longmode).

 

[thecoolnessrune]

Originally posted by: the Chase
On a related note-Im happy with my A64's performance and everything, but are we ever going to see 64-bit programs out? Is it going to take everyone switching to Vista before this finally happens?

I believe a 64 bit edition of Far Cry was released. no performance increase.

 

[xtknight]

Originally posted by: michaelpatrick33

Originally posted by: fbrdphreak

Originally posted by: Ricemarine
We'll in reality, we aren't really using 64-bit processors...
For then we wouldn't be able to run 32-bit apps period.

We'll in reality, we are really using 64-bit processors. A64's are just able to "emulate" 32-bit mode and I believe, just use 32 bits of the registers.

That is incorrect. There is no emulation of 32bit code. It is a full 32bit processor with X86-64 extensions (and 8 additional GPR's when in 64bit Longmode).

Yup. Notice x86-64 in the Instructions list in CPU-Z?

 

[imported_Technomancer]

Originally posted by: fbrdphreak

Originally posted by: Ricemarine
We'll in reality, we aren't really using 64-bit processors...
For then we wouldn't be able to run 32-bit apps period.

We'll in reality, we are really using 64-bit processors. A64's are just able to "emulate" 32-bit mode and I believe, just use 32 bits of the registers.

Need I remind you that our old 32-bit processors are only able to "emulate" 16-bit code? It's still used in such basic components as installation programs because developers are lazy.