Intel is going to integrate Memory controllers on Server chips...

[BWMerlin]

What does all this new tech mean to me, you and Joe Blogs. What will it enable us to do that we haven?t been able to do before. What would I expect to see improvements in? While this all sounds very exciting I just would like to know what it will mean to me in a real world sense.

 

[Sentential]

Originally posted by: clarkey01
Intel does have a point to point bus in the works.

Thats what CSI is as he explained eariler. Plus its not point-to-point, its a ring design that Intel is going for.

 

[gnomepunk]

Originally posted by: cbehnken
Yes, please don't piss Intel off, they might buy AMD.

Quote of the Year.

 

[gnomepunk]

Still laughing....Sig'd!

 

[Fox5]

2. Whitefield...combining Itanium and Xeon into a single platform

How? Xeons were always P4 based......so what's going on? Will they just share the same motherboards, cause so far they've been completely different architectures, and if they make them the same architecture, isn't that just killing Xeon?

 

[Intelia]

Originally posted by: BWMerlin
What does all this new tech mean to me, you and Joe Blogs. What will it enable us to do that we haven?t been able to do before. What would I expect to see improvements in? While this all sounds very exciting I just would like to know what it will mean to me in a real world sense.

I do a lot of web sites and the memory required to do animations and such is quit heavy.
Most the time I well have 5 or 6 programs running. Anything that can speed up my PC is going to save me time. I really like the dual cores but we never buy 1st generation hardware so well wait.(for our personnel use) R520 is a 1st generation so well wait . David kinda laughs about this because he wants Merom (What he really wants is Itanic) so its really working out very well for us . Better for me than him though. Because I well get my Yonah entertainment center way before he gets his Dualing duallies set up. lol.
David is a little upset right now because he can't find any info on Merom CSI. So now he is thinking he has to wait for CSI. He really likes Updating about once every 2 to 3 years. He just started laughing at me about the yonah entertainment center. Said it better be more than that because my PC is going in the garage when its done. (I didn't know that.) I told him thats alright his PC will look real nice on my desk .

 

[Viditor]

Originally posted by: Fox5

2. Whitefield...combining Itanium and Xeon into a single platform

How? Xeons were always P4 based......so what's going on? Will they just share the same motherboards, cause so far they've been completely different architectures, and if they make them the same architecture, isn't that just killing Xeon?

If I knew how, I'd be making a LOT more money than I am now!
My guess is that they will modify the architecture of both so that they can run on the same socket. This will give you 2 flavours for the same socket, EPIC or x86-64.
Of course by then, I'm not sure how much life Itanium/Epic will still have.

 

[Intelia]

Originally posted by: Viditor

Originally posted by: Fox5

2. Whitefield...combining Itanium and Xeon into a single platform

How? Xeons were always P4 based......so what's going on? Will they just share the same motherboards, cause so far they've been completely different architectures, and if they make them the same architecture, isn't that just killing Xeon?

If I knew how, I'd be making a LOT more money than I am now!
My guess is that they will modify the architecture of both so that they can run on the same socket. This will give you 2 flavours for the same socket, EPIC or x86-64.
Of course by then, I'm not sure how much life Itanium/Epic will still have.

Even if they do combin arch. for the desktop we still need a O/S . David says if Apple does a O/S for Itanic people would be shocked at the power of this 2.0GHz cpu. In order for Itanic to show its power it needs to run 64 bit tech free and clean no hacks. This is the problem with the Itanic everything is x86 for the desktop.

Right now with the hacks that are used to make it run its only as fast as the fastest X86 platforms currently available. At much higher cost you get a cpu that is only running at 1/3 of its capacity not a good deal. Intel needs a EPIC for the desktop like yesterday.(microsoft is very afraid of this tech . Thats why its not available.) Man I don't like them at all .

 

[Viditor]

G'day Intellia!

I think you and David have a few big misconceptions about Itanium and Epic...
It would never work well for the desktop by it's very nature. The design theory behind Itanium is to strip away all of the handles that we use in x86, and just run very fast highly optimized code. This was fine for the server world because when Itanium was being developed, servers ran very few programs anyway, and speed was the most important thing.
Microsoft has had Windows XP-Itanium for years now, but the rest of the software developers have been reluctant to completely rewrite their applications in EPIC without a large enough base. At present, there are less than 2000 applications that are written for Itanium. You can't really blame them because as it turns out (and as Intel couldn't have foreseen), x86-64 runs the existing apps just about as fast and requires little to no changes be made.
Apple would NEVER write their OS in EPIC because none of the apps that run on the Mac would work on it...

 

[IntelUser2000]

Yeah but the CSI(point-to-point bus) is designed by ex-Alpha engineers that got transferred to Intel, and they are only deciding to use it since the most important use is for MP CPUs, which Intel Itanium and Xeon MPs are suited for. Itanium will go IMC/CSI first and then Xeon MPs since in desktops they are not that necessary(and its true as if you look at Pentium M).

 

[Viditor]

Originally posted by: IntelUser2000
Yeah but the CSI(point-to-point bus) is designed by ex-Alpha engineers that got transferred to Intel, and they are only deciding to use it since the most important use is for MP CPUs, which Intel Itanium and Xeon MPs are suited for. Itanium will go IMC/CSI first and then Xeon MPs since in desktops they are not that necessary(and its true as if you look at Pentium M).

Well, just a few corrections...

1. It's not point to point but a ring structure. Higher latency but more bandwidth possible...
2. It will be coming out for both Itanium AND Xeon simutaneously as it's for the Whitefield platform...
3. It will certainly be necessary for the desktop at some point as well. The issue has nothing to do with the processor, it has do due with the limitations of a FSB. Remember that a FSB is a bottleneck for the rest of the system...
4. Pentium M does fine as a mobile part in 32 bit at slower speeds...any other prognostication is pure speculation.