Microsoft Delays 64-Bit Windows

[Spitfire_x86]

<A HREF="http://www.pcworld.com/news/article/0,aid,117119,00.asp" target="_new">Click</A>


------------
<A HREF="http://geocities.com/spitfire_x86" target="_new">My Website</A>

<A HREF="http://geocities.com/spitfire_x86/myrig.html" target="_new">My Rig</A> & <A HREF="http://geocities.com/spitfire_x86/benchmark.html" target="_new">3DMark score</A>

 

[Mephistopheles]

This is not good news at all... :frown:

<i><font color=red>You never change the existing reality by fighting it. Instead, create a new model that makes the old one obsolete</font color=red> - Buckminster Fuller </i>

 

[johy99]

Terrible. First they delayed the final release of Windows XP SP2 (final version), and now this! What's up with MS?

 

[TheRod]

What's up with MS?

MS is a monopoly, so why would they bother with release date, they don't have competition.

--
Asus A7N8X / <font color=green><b>AMD Sempron 2800+</b></font color=green> (tbred @ 167x12)
Kingston DDR333 2x256Megs
<font color=red>Built by ATI Radeon 8500LE 128Megs</font color=red> @ C:275/M:290

 

[ChipDeath]

Maybe intel.., erm, made it "Worth MS's while" to delay it a bit.... You gotta admit it helps them out somewhat
[/conspiracy theorist]

Seriously though, that's a real bummer :frown: . I was waiting to see what the 'official' release was like...

---
Epox 8RDA+ V1.1 w/ Custom NB HS
XP1700+ @200x10 (~2Ghz), 1.4 Vcore
2x256Mb Corsair PC3200LL 2-2-2-4
Sapphire 9800Pro @412/740

 

[Mephistopheles]

Apparently, that's not the case. See <A HREF="http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=17457" target="_new">this article</A> for more info; it seems AMD says Intel has nothing to do with it... and they'd be the first ones to curse Intel, wouldn't they?

In any case, this sucks big time...

<i><font color=red>You never change the existing reality by fighting it. Instead, create a new model that makes the old one obsolete</font color=red> - Buckminster Fuller </i>

 

[ChipDeath]

I wasn't being serious anyhoo...

I think this quote from that article:

When asked flat out, both Intel and AMD people told me that Intel did not do anything to slow down Win iAMD64's release, it is simply the fault, good or bad, of MS.

Seems far more likely, given M$'s track record :lol:

Still annoying that it's being delayed though.

---
Epox 8RDA+ V1.1 w/ Custom NB HS
XP1700+ @200x10 (~2Ghz), 1.4 Vcore
2x256Mb Corsair PC3200LL 2-2-2-4
Sapphire 9800Pro @412/740

 

[gpol2162]

First half of 2005. My comp will be old news by then (there will probably be dual core chips by then). I really hope some 64-bit software comes out soon.

Question: Is Service pack 2 for windows XP to let it utilize 64-bits?

 

[Mr5oh]

Well I figure they will finally release the offical Service Pack 2 about the same time as 64-bit version of Windows.

Seems to be nothing but delays at Microsoft these days.

 

[Mephistopheles]

As for dual-core, a little off topic, but...

I think I'm going to upgrade to a dual-core CPU next time... I mean, I'm currently on a dual P3-933Mhz, and dual cpus are a tremendous joy to use. Single-threaded performance might not be completely up-to-date, but I can use tens of heavy programs and not lose system responsiveness at all! I once tested three very heavy threads at once (a small program I wrote) and the OS attributed ~33% of the total computing power to each thread. And even then, I still managed to run IE and netscape and surf the web!!! A single-core computer would have been crushed by that workload. Heck, with three ultra-heavy threads + netscape, I even thought a dual-cpu setup would falter, but it didn't.

So long live multicore, it's a good thing. If it comes with 64-bit, the better!!! Just imagine my next computer... two cores, 64-bit, woooow....

<i><font color=red>You never change the existing reality by fighting it. Instead, create a new model that makes the old one obsolete</font color=red> - Buckminster Fuller </i>

 

[slvr_phoenix]

The 64-bit delays are really not all that big of a surprise considering just how loverly the first glimpse of the performance was.

Compound that with the development black hole that is security-done-right in WinXP SP2, which will no doubt influence the 64-bit flavours as well, and you've got one big M$ (pronounced either as 'em-ess' or just 'mess').

Besides, it wouldn't surprise me if part of the delay can also be attributed to M$ trying to find a DRM-tastic Ass. Of America (RIAA/MPAA) partnership / revenue source. Expect the actual launch to be partnered with trendy theme music fanfare that you can download at a 'special' price of <i>only</i> 50c.

<pre><b><font color=red>"Build a man a fire and he's warm for the rest of the evening.
Set a man on fire and he's warm for the rest of his life." - Steve Taylor</font color=red></b></pre><p>

 

[Johanthegnarler]

That's why i wont buy 64 bit. There is absolutely no reason to do it yet. I love AMD but not enough to buy a cpu when i know dual core cpu's are around the corner..(cough year cough)

<A HREF="http://arc.aquamark3.com/arc/arc_view.php?run=277124623" target="_new">http://arc.aquamark3.com/arc/arc_view.php?run=277124623</A>
46,510 , movin on up. 48k new goal. Maybe not.. :/

 

[P4Man]

Why would you wait for dual core ? It won't perform terribly different from dual cpu, which you can buy right now. Why don't people buy SMP systems, but do they put all their hope on dual core ??


= The views stated herein are my personal views, and not necessarily the views of my wife. =

 

[Spitfire_x86]

Dual core system should cost less than Dual CPU system

------------
<A HREF="http://geocities.com/spitfire_x86" target="_new">My Website</A>

<A HREF="http://geocities.com/spitfire_x86/myrig.html" target="_new">My Rig</A> & <A HREF="http://geocities.com/spitfire_x86/benchmark.html" target="_new">3DMark score</A>

 

[P4Man]

>Dual core system should cost less than Dual CPU system

Says who ? There is two sides to this, cost and price:
-cost:
motherboards will be cheaper, no doubt, they will be the same we use for single core.
But cpu will be twice as large (assuming doubling of the cache) which automatically makes it more expensive than 2 cpu's half the size since yields will be lower on dual core chips.
-Price: to me it looks quite obvious that at least in the next 1 or 2 years, dual core chips will be positioned as "uberchips" for the highend workstation market, server market or the P4EE/Athlon FX extreme gamer markets.

Currently you can buy an Athlon MP 2800+ for $168 and a SMP motherboard for less than $200. Yet no one does, and for a reason. Same reason I doubt dual core chips will be worth the $$$ for most users here: considerable price premium with little to no benefit for the apps we use.

= The views stated herein are my personal views, and not necessarily the views of my wife. =

 

[Spitfire_x86]

You're forgetting that all SMP mobos require ECC RAM


------------
<A HREF="http://geocities.com/spitfire_x86" target="_new">My Website</A>

<A HREF="http://geocities.com/spitfire_x86/myrig.html" target="_new">My Rig</A> & <A HREF="http://geocities.com/spitfire_x86/benchmark.html" target="_new">3DMark score</A>

 

[Schmeh]

I seriously doubt that we will see dual core processors on the consumer level before the very end of 2005 early 2006. There may be a few samples of them, but not retail or oem ones. The other thing we might see is dual core versions of Opteron and Xeon or Itanium first and they probably won't be around till the end of 2005.

 

[P4Man]

AFAIK 760MPX doesnt require registered RAM unless you want >2 GB.

= The views stated herein are my personal views, and not necessarily the views of my wife. =

 

[xeenrecoil]

I have seriously considered putting together a Dual Xeon core, its not that i dont have the cash, its that i cant justify reasons good enough to do it, sure its a fun idea to toss around, but when it comes right down to it, there just isnt a reason for it, when your talking about home use, couple games here and there, some Seti@Home on BOINC perhaps, but nothing critical, most users who would consider themselves hardcore computer users are nothing more then gamers, do gamers really need a dual core? not really...no
Im sure they would say oh but your wrong blah blah blah...and some more blah blah blah, but really they dont need it. So what are we talking about here then...its all about my e-penis is larger then your e-penis, hosing down the decks with testosterone, yeah thats it thats the ticket...

 

[Mephistopheles]

You do have a point in the sense that current software is 99% unable to take any advantage of multithreading. However, once dual core processors are reality, software may become more tuned to make adequate use of it... Multicore approaches can herald a big performance boost, if software takes advantage of it. It's always the same story... x86-64 can also give a performance boost (less than dual core, though) <i>if software is changed</i>. Changing for x86-64 is probably easier than changing for multithreading; however, x86-64 cannot compare to the increases in performance we might be seeing in 2005/2006 due to multicore setups.

Every new technology which is truly new requires software to change in order to build on those new technologies and their potential... IA64, x86-64, HT, multicore... these require software to take advantage, to one or another degree (IA64, for instance, is the most terrible example of that)...

<i><font color=red>You never change the existing reality by fighting it. Instead, create a new model that makes the old one obsolete</font color=red> - Buckminster Fuller </i>

 

[slvr_phoenix]

The problem with multithreading software is that it makes code a <i>lot</i> more complex, makes debugging somewhere between extremely difficult to almost completely impossible, introduces a whole new world of timing issue bugs, and in general isn't worth the man-hours needed to implement when compared to the minimal performance gains that the vast majority of users (being single-CPU boxes) will see.

Sure, some software is in a different class where there are enough users with multi-CPU boxes to make that extreme amount of effort worth it. And <i>maybe</i> if multi-cored CPUs become common it will become worth it enough for the majority of software developers to pull their hair out as they do it. And then again, maybe not.

<pre><b><font color=red>"Build a man a fire and he's warm for the rest of the evening.
Set a man on fire and he's warm for the rest of his life." - Steve Taylor</font color=red></b></pre><p>

 

[Guest]

Back to the topic, Id rather see MS pushing back the release then having a product that is ready at 25%(given that all Ms product are 50% ready when we get them ;-) )
Anyhow considering all the job that ahs to been done to switch all the driver to 64bit and test them etc...I dont want to see a Win ME fiasco with half ass 32bit drivers running on a patched 16 bit os...

Asus P4P800DX, P4C 2.6ghz@3.25ghz, 2X512 OCZ PC4000 3-4-4-8, Leadtek FX5900 w/ FX5950U bios@500/1000, 2X30gig Raid0

 

[slvr_phoenix]

I dont want to see a Win ME fiasco with half ass 32bit drivers running on a patched 16 bit os...

Or more accurately, a patched 32-bit OS running old 16-bit drivers through a half-arsed emulation.

<pre><b><font color=red>"Build a man a fire and he's warm for the rest of the evening.
Set a man on fire and he's warm for the rest of his life." - Steve Taylor</font color=red></b></pre><p>

 

[Guest]

err yeah got it backward but yeah that what I meant.
Couldnt that stuff happen with Win 64 if its rushed out?

Asus P4P800DX, P4C 2.6ghz@3.25ghz, 2X512 OCZ PC4000 3-4-4-8, Leadtek FX5900 w/ FX5950U bios@500/1000, 2X30gig Raid0

 

[slvr_phoenix]

That depends on how M$ implements it. The (supposedly) huge advantage of x86-64 is that you can run 32-bit flawlessly while running 64-bit simultaneously. So in theory it shouldn't be a problem. But then, in theory, it shouldn't have been a problem for M$ when they wrote the PoS that was WinME either. So really it could go either way.

"Welcome to the jungle." - Guns N' Roses, Welcome to the Jungle
"These foolish games are tearing me apart." - Jewel, Foolish Games

You know, I used to actually like M$. Now I'm indifferent at best. :\ One might even call me **gasp** cynical. Pity. Oh well. Such is life.

<pre><b><font color=red>"Build a man a fire and he's warm for the rest of the evening.
Set a man on fire and he's warm for the rest of his life." - Steve Taylor</font color=red></b></pre><p>