Here's a link maybe these people know what operating systems run on the Itanium processor. Look under features
http://www.intel.com/products/processor/itanium2/index.htm
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by: Intelia
All so most of the market well follow the Hardware not the software.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ya if theres more than just a MS operating system for desk top you bet they will! If Apple does use Itanium in 07-08 there well be alot of Apple people working on many apps. to make this happen. Key word IF IF
Quote
if that was true intel and x86/cisc wouldn't exist anymore.
************************************************
Its true and X86/cisc is still here . Dig into this a little deeper you will find out why .
I thought I read that if you port any of these O/S the Itanium. Speed is reduced by 2/3. Its amazing that Intel can't hire people to make O/S that supports this EPIC.
platform.
I think Apple can do it we will see. I think not sure but isn't Apple RISC and they did a fine job on that.
Quote
it certainly isn't because x86 was outperforming risc, risc was smacking x86. Intel won because x86 was the standard, and every peice of software out ther ran on it and not risc.
**************************************************************************************************************************************************
You said it right! INTEL WON. So now Intel can win again. I can see everyone fleeing Intel because of EPIC (not). Intel has power. If they get Jobs to produce Intel and Apple will have the power . Microsoft loses. I am all for that. And Intel well still have X86-64-emulations. As Apple builds market share it will be like a domino effect. MAYBE I DON'T Know .
http://www.intel.com/products/processor/itanium2/index.htm
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by: Intelia
All so most of the market well follow the Hardware not the software.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ya if theres more than just a MS operating system for desk top you bet they will! If Apple does use Itanium in 07-08 there well be alot of Apple people working on many apps. to make this happen. Key word IF IF
Quote
if that was true intel and x86/cisc wouldn't exist anymore.
************************************************
Its true and X86/cisc is still here . Dig into this a little deeper you will find out why .
I thought I read that if you port any of these O/S the Itanium. Speed is reduced by 2/3. Its amazing that Intel can't hire people to make O/S that supports this EPIC.
platform.
I think Apple can do it we will see. I think not sure but isn't Apple RISC and they did a fine job on that.
Quote
it certainly isn't because x86 was outperforming risc, risc was smacking x86. Intel won because x86 was the standard, and every peice of software out ther ran on it and not risc.
**************************************************************************************************************************************************
You said it right! INTEL WON. So now Intel can win again. I can see everyone fleeing Intel because of EPIC (not). Intel has power. If they get Jobs to produce Intel and Apple will have the power . Microsoft loses. I am all for that. And Intel well still have X86-64-emulations. As Apple builds market share it will be like a domino effect. MAYBE I DON'T Know .
its the same reason you can't run x86 windows on risc hardware. Also itanium in not "real" 64 bit any more than alpha, opteron, or power are real 64 bit.
it certainly isn't because x86 was outperforming risc, risc was smacking x86. Intel won because x86 was the standard, and every peice of software out ther ran on it and not risc.
edit: please learn to quote properly. also, while you're at it, off yourself.
If anyone can show me a link were there is an O/S that is built for EPIC . Please post it .
Built for EPIC only now!!! no porting
Quote
its the same reason you can't run x86 windows on risc hardware. Also itanium in not "real" 64 bit any more than alpha, opteron, or power are real 64 bit.
*************************************************************************
Doesn't Intel run apple OS right now? If Apple wants it to ? Yes it does.
**********************************************************************
Itanium is true 64 bit . Oppy's 64's and Intel 64's are emulated. Do you need a definition for emulations? X86-64 is not now nor will it every be true 64 bit platform.
EPIC has no true O/S as of yet so you are correct in away in that Itanium isn't true 64 bit until a O/S is written that doesn't choke it.
*************************************************************************
emulate-toTRY to be as good as or Better than.
Notice I used large caps on both TRY and Better . In this instance TRY is correct and BETTER on X86 -64 platform can't be done.
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by: Intelia
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by: Vegitto
Intelia: For the last fvcking time, it's Itanium, not Itanic.
In other news: Troll post, ignored.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Know way Itanic sticks. It was AMD fanboys that named the doomed chip lets see if she sinks. I think not! Itanic stays for all time.
( Titanic unsinkable ship!! Itanic the chip that just won't go down !! Intel backed away from P4P and netburst it won't happen to the Itanic.)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
quote
osted by Clarkey01
Can you even tell me Itanium's strong points ?
Why im not happy with it.
1. It was late by serval years
2. It didnt kill the X86 world (So very true but now as 64 bits apps have to be written this will change)*****************************************
3. COST ( Prices are dropping and the more they sell the cheaper they will become)*******************************
4. Poor emulation ( This is my point emulated O/S -This has to change or it well never be succesful)*********************************
5. X86 continues to grow ( Again true but now apps have to be written for X86-64 so many will follow Intels lead with Apples help.)*********************************
6. Development has been scaled way back (that doesn't show in the road maps)**********************************************
7. AMD sells more semprons I bet then this "X86" killer. It's a fact that Opteron has outsold Itaium by a factor of 10 and that was a year ago .( Xoens out sell Itaniums by 300% And Oppy's out sell them buy 1000% What is AMD a monoply outselling Xoens by 700%***********************************************
8. Xeon's outsell it by about oh, 300%( Way off Xeon out sells it way more than that)****
Built for EPIC only now!!! no porting
Quote
its the same reason you can't run x86 windows on risc hardware. Also itanium in not "real" 64 bit any more than alpha, opteron, or power are real 64 bit.
*************************************************************************
Doesn't Intel run apple OS right now? If Apple wants it to ? Yes it does.
**********************************************************************
Itanium is true 64 bit . Oppy's 64's and Intel 64's are emulated. Do you need a definition for emulations? X86-64 is not now nor will it every be true 64 bit platform.
EPIC has no true O/S as of yet so you are correct in away in that Itanium isn't true 64 bit until a O/S is written that doesn't choke it.
*************************************************************************
emulate-toTRY to be as good as or Better than.
Notice I used large caps on both TRY and Better . In this instance TRY is correct and BETTER on X86 -64 platform can't be done.
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by: Intelia
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by: Vegitto
Intelia: For the last fvcking time, it's Itanium, not Itanic.
In other news: Troll post, ignored.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Know way Itanic sticks. It was AMD fanboys that named the doomed chip lets see if she sinks. I think not! Itanic stays for all time.
( Titanic unsinkable ship!! Itanic the chip that just won't go down !! Intel backed away from P4P and netburst it won't happen to the Itanic.)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
quote
osted by Clarkey01Can you even tell me Itanium's strong points ?
Why im not happy with it.
1. It was late by serval years
2. It didnt kill the X86 world (So very true but now as 64 bits apps have to be written this will change)*****************************************
3. COST ( Prices are dropping and the more they sell the cheaper they will become)*******************************
4. Poor emulation ( This is my point emulated O/S -This has to change or it well never be succesful)*********************************
5. X86 continues to grow ( Again true but now apps have to be written for X86-64 so many will follow Intels lead with Apples help.)*********************************
6. Development has been scaled way back (that doesn't show in the road maps)**********************************************
7. AMD sells more semprons I bet then this "X86" killer. It's a fact that Opteron has outsold Itaium by a factor of 10 and that was a year ago .( Xoens out sell Itaniums by 300% And Oppy's out sell them buy 1000% What is AMD a monoply outselling Xoens by 700%***********************************************
8. Xeon's outsell it by about oh, 300%( Way off Xeon out sells it way more than that)****
Ignore the 64 bit part of it.
Itanium(IA64) is a completely different architecture from x86, just as ARM, Power, and 68k are.
Itanium is a 64 bit cpu that is capable of emulating x86 and has hardware specifically in it to speed up emulation.
X86-64 is a 64 bit cpu that is capable of emulating x86 because it includes all the functionality of x86. Think of it like Direct X 9 to Direct X 8, Direct X 9 has all the features of DirectX 8, but it is definetely a new and seperate version of Direct X and not emulating new features.
Both IA64 and x86-64 are capable of emulating x86(though x86-64 does so much faster), but IA64 and x86-64 are completely incompatible.
You said it right, you don't know!
Why would Intel hedge its bets on Apple becoming a dominant player? If Apple stays as they are, Intel is then screwed. What Apple may use Intel for is the realization Intel has had recently...cpus don't matter that much, it's the platform as a whole that matters. Intel may push things onto Apple, but they won't be estoric cpu architectures, they'll be revolutionary ideas in what a computer should be, along the lines of a Mac Mini and what not. Outside changes, not inside.
The thing is, x86-64 can't emulate 64bit, 64 bit is not an architecture, it is nothing more than a function, a feature of an architecture. It's like saying the 8 cylinder engine in my car can't emulate 4 liters, it makes no sense at all.
x86, IA64, PPC, and Arm are nothing more than programming restrictions. These are the codes you can use that the proceessor can recognize. X86-64 expands on the codes that x86 had, mainly so now you can send the processor 64 bit data types. 64 bit is nothing special, Itanium could be 32 bit and be 99% as good as it is now.
Eh, Titanic sank, and very very fast too. Not a good thing to compare something you like to.
Any Intel has backed away from Netburst? They still plan to support it up till 2007, presumebly their Xeon line may support it even longer than that, and Intel backed away from the Pentium 3 at one point, you may see Netburst brought back in the future, when fabrication advances allow it to be produced better.
Sigh.....
2. 64 bit doesn't mean much, 64 bit does not give performance, except in instances where it's required. Hmm, well technically you couuld emulate 64 bit using multiple 32bit data types, this is not how x86-64 works though, x86-64 can support a single data type that is 64 bit, emulation is done when hardware support isn't available. Intel's Xeons had to emulate 64 bit so they could access more than 2GB of data, it was very slow, x86-64 does not have to emulate 64bit and is just as fast at 64 bit as x86 was at 32 bit.
Also, x86-64 is nothing like IA64. If anything, required multithreading in apps will make porting to IA64 easier, as it wasn't 64 bit that made IA64 hard to program for.
3. That's great, at the current rate, it'll only take about 100 years before they become affordable.
4. Itanium only emulated x86, Windows for IA64 was not an emulation, old Windows programs on Windows for IA64 were an emulation. Native Windows IA64 programs still had poor performance since most programs are incapable of being rewritten or hard to rewrite for Itanium, multithreading, or stream processors.
5. X86-64 doesn't require anything to be rewritten, that's what compilers are for. You use the same source code, and the compiler handles everything else, so it's not difficult to write for x86-64. This also means it isn't difficult to rewrite code for any architecture, just use the compiler. However, x86-64's strengths and weaknesses are exactly the same as x86, meaning all optimizations that work well for x86 still work well for x86-64, porting to Itanium or Power or any other architecture would require new optimizations. Basically, x86-64 takes almost no effort to support, just a software update.
7. WTF are you smoking? Xeons outsell Opterons 6 to 1(that's 600%), and Xeons outsell Itaniums by about 200 to 1(that's 20000%).
BTW, I'm just curious, could you find a list of the world's top super computers and count the number of them using Itaniums? I believe it's quite a few, though I could be wrong.
So this guy said 2 years ago apple and Intel (who else would have believed . I bet this guy took a beating on his predictions.
But he was off buy 2 years. So what he made a great call
Itanium failed. No MS failed to create a good EPIC O/S
He thought Itanium still might go someplace still. Looks like he may be right as soon as Apple brings out a good EPIC O/S.
Why would a 2% market share company go for lowly Itanium chip? Because Steve Jobs has a great big ego and he is brillant. Also just because he wants to.
Steve Jobs will succeed were Bill Gates failed . What goes around comes around.
Facts how can there be any facts.
Based on this mans predictions I will go with what he said. He was right 2 years ago thats good enough for me.
YOU want facts heres a fact . AMD64 without the ondie memory contoller would not be as fast as a P4C 3.2GHz. So it is not a better CPU it just has way less latency. And that is a FACT.
Fox 5 I will bet that 2/3 the people here would agree with everthing you said . The only thing I seen you get right was the use of more memory. You never even mentioned the register. How many times do I have to say there is no O/S for EPIC. If there is post a LINK. That should be easy from all the statements in your post.(not)
To all users reading this:
The 'user' that goes by the nickname of 'Intelia', does not know anything. Do NOT be misleaded by this troll.
Thank you.
The 'user' that goes by the nickname of 'Intelia', does not know anything. Do NOT be misleaded by this troll.
Thank you.
Seconded. Only on this 4th page did he/she/it learn that IA64 and X86-64 are completely different, and now he/she/it has also learned that Itanium is EPIC architecture.
There are O/Ss for Itanium, you refuse to read the benchmarks i posted where they get slaughtered on that O/S, spouting off that it isnt just for IA64 :thumbsdown:
You continuously think that through some magic software coding that Itanium can gain some sort of performance increase that will make it match or beat current gen CPUs, the pentium 4 extreme edition, Opteron 250, Pentium-m, Gallatin Xeons, and many many other CPUs compete with this CPU. There is no reason for a company to go through this enormous cost burden unless they are custom developing EVERYTHING from the ground up for itanium, costing millions in software and hardware, for that extra what? ~20% performance that could be had for much less money with clustering X86-64 servers anyway.
Itanium is a failure, Apple will not use itanium, If apple does use itanium, It will fail on an Apple platform too.
The new Mac G7 powered by the Intel Itanium processor! 1.6ghz 9MB cache, 256MB of ram, Geforce 6200 TC, 40GB IDE HD. $4999!
wait wait i thought we werent comparing anything to AMD on this thread as you stated before when i brought it up.
_________________________________________________________________________
YOU want facts heres a fact . AMD64 without the ondie memory contoller would not be as fast as a P4C 3.2GHz. So it is not a better CPU it just has way less latency. And that is a FACT.
_________________________________________________________________________
thats the dumbest thing i ve ever heard. the memory controller is part of the design, so of course it helps it. if everyone took a new innovation and shoved it aside because the design had evolved to the next level instead of just improving on the design, technology wouldnt be anywhere. i would ask for a link but all you give are search engine results, so shut up.
_________________________________________________________________________
YOU want facts heres a fact . AMD64 without the ondie memory contoller would not be as fast as a P4C 3.2GHz. So it is not a better CPU it just has way less latency. And that is a FACT.
_________________________________________________________________________
thats the dumbest thing i ve ever heard. the memory controller is part of the design, so of course it helps it. if everyone took a new innovation and shoved it aside because the design had evolved to the next level instead of just improving on the design, technology wouldnt be anywhere. i would ask for a link but all you give are search engine results, so shut up.
Aquila76
Diamond Member
I can notarize the Motion to Ban, if you'd like.
Intelia's ramblings in this thread remind me of a quote from Billy Madison:
"What you've just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul."
More than 5 of those motions were started, everytime everyone wanted Intelia and the other trolls banned and everytime the mods ignored it and closed the thread.
No point in doing it, so just ignore Intelia.
Aquila76
Diamond Member
We really could use an "Ignore User" option here like most forums/discussion boards have. That would keep a lot of the trolling/flaming down I think. Although some of the comments are good for a laugh as they fly in the face of any kind of logic.
Iam not the one rambling . I just now on this page found out the EPIC is differant than CISC or RISC. NOW THATS rambling when infact I clearly knew the differance .I put up 4 or % links not one link from anyone here that supports your babblings., I understand Why AMD is Afraid of EPIC do you.
Getting this on a more interesting topic...
How is the weather where ppl live?? Here in Liberal hell-hole Oregon it is a mild day, overast with a chance of showers....
How is the weather where ppl live?? Here in Liberal hell-hole Oregon it is a mild day, overast with a chance of showers....
Hey another sidenote...I am getting my X2 today!!!! My centrino laptop wont be here until next week!!!
They are not Afraid of Epic. They actually have cross license agreement with Intel on their whole porfolio. They could make an Epic proc and may have a team dedicated to working on it if everything didn't go their way. They on the other hand stepped up and decied to battle it head on by extending x86 to 64bits. Thats right AMD can and maybe will build a IA64 CPU but they don't need to nor do they want to.
Capt Caveman
Lifer
- Jan 30, 2005
- 34,543
- 651
- 126
Cool, can't wait to hear your observations and results. I played around lastnight w/ my X2 4400+ and got up to 2.75ghz but the system keeps locking-up at 2.8ghz. I'm pretty sure I can get it stable but being reserve w/ my voltages.
On another sidenote, I left my job yesterday and in three weeks will be moving from dreadful Boston(34 years) to San Francisco. Driving cross-country and may go wireless broadband to make it til I get to SF. I also picked-up CoPilot Live GPS/Mapping software for my laptop so, it'll be pretty cool to use that as I'm driving.
Aquila76
Diamond Member
Cool man, I'm working on getting out of near-Boston to go to San Diego. Probably next year though, I have quite a number of 'loose ends' to tie up here before I can go. Last winter was the final kick to the @$$ I needed to get my plans finalized and in motion.
EDIT: I'll have to find someway to watch the Red Sox and Patriot games though. Torrent?
If Microsoft had it in for Intel, then why did they wait until Intel made EMT-64 processors before releasing Windows XP 64-bit edition? Also what the heck does this mean in the article: "For Intel to keep growing, people have to replace their PCs more often and Microsoft's bloatware strategy just isn't making that happen, especially if they keep delaying Longhorn."
Stupid bloatware is exactly what makes us upgrade all the time. Every new M$ OS makes you want to upgrade. The driving force for processor upgrades these days is video encoding and decoding applications. I'd say Win XP MCE, put some money in Intel's pocket with people now doing more processor intensive things with their Media Center computers.
Stupid bloatware is exactly what makes us upgrade all the time. Every new M$ OS makes you want to upgrade. The driving force for processor upgrades these days is video encoding and decoding applications. I'd say Win XP MCE, put some money in Intel's pocket with people now doing more processor intensive things with their Media Center computers.
The Yonah core Intel chips that Apple will likely be using support a new virtualization technology code named Vanderpool that according to Wikipedia "allow
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 23K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter