Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

too shay

Last response: in CPUs
Share
August 18, 2001 8:01:32 AM

" AMD Releases x86-64 Specifications

Last week AMD announced the availability of vital information for its 64-bit answer to Intel's Itanium. AMD also christened its upcoming 64-bit line of microprocessors as "Hammer," with the first offering still commonly known as Sledgehammer (see Jerry Sanders's interview below for a possible change). The AMD Hammer line of microprocessors will be based on AMD's x86-64(tm) architectural specifications. The x86-64 specification is currently detailed in publicly available documents on AMD's Web site.

The x86-64 architecture is a logical and simple extension to the current x86-32 instruction set architecture currently used in all Windows based PCs. Intel chose a different tact with its 64-bit Itanium by not only introducing a different instruction set, but by also implementing a radical and complex design that is ultimately dependent on equally new and radical compiler technology. Intel's attempt to drive the problem ridden and chronically late Itanium into the market suffered another setback as recently as last month. There is now serious doubt that Intel will be able to make good on its promise to deliver 800MHz Itaniums before year's end.

Few foresee problems with either implementation of the Hammer designs or sufficient compiler support for AMD's x86-64 since the number 2 CPU company's design is based on well understood and widely known principles. The Itanium flounders when running 32-bit code (all modern Windows software) as it is optimized for 64-bit VLIW (Very Long Instruction Word) architecture. Athlons, Coppermines, P4s, Mustangs and perhaps even Durons will outperform Itaniums running "legacy" software. The Hammer family is quite different as it serves up un-compromised 32-bit performance. In fact, AMD's Drew Prarie has confirmed that the Sledgehammer ....

"will have two processors on a single die so the Sledgehammer will not just be a fast 64-bit processor, but it will likely also be the fastest processor available running 32-bit software. "


http://www6.tomshardware.com/column/00q3/000822/

More about : shay

Anonymous
a b à CPUs
August 18, 2001 12:29:06 PM

Quote:
well, anyways you guys probably wouldn't understand the articles anyway's,


Thanks for enlightening me.. I understand now.. yeah.. well I think... 64 bit language and all..kick ass.. and very efficient.. woosh.. maybe I'll have to read some more of Toms in depth info.. thanks for the tip

---- Owner of the only Dell computer with an AMD chip
August 18, 2001 12:56:41 PM

IA64 is NOT the next Pentium. It is a whole new chip specifically designed for higher end servers. While there will likely be a P5 in a couple years, it will likely not resemble IA64.

Mark-

When all else fails, throw your computer out the window!!!
Related resources
August 19, 2001 4:02:34 AM

The real question on Hammer will be the cost it will have when it comes out. I sure do hope AMD can make it go mainstream as fast as possible so that they can truely dominate the market. If not i do fear that Intel will take an upper hand in the race.

64 bit and an Antlon as well :)  You cant beat that combo!

ALL HAIL HAMMER ! heh

Rop

Why do I use LINUX ? Cause its the BEST OS
Why do I use Windows? Cause its the BEST Nintendo..
August 19, 2001 8:27:10 AM

Itanium is not next Pentium.

Intel will for sure make a 32 bit P5 sometime later since they need to stay in the mainstram processor business.

The Itanuim is a clear diversification from their current line into high end server and workstation arena. And I do expect a Itanium-II in a few years.

Pentium and Itanium are two radically different processor lines, sharing the common roots in x86 architecture.

girish

<font color=red>No system is fool-proof. Fools are Ingenious!</font color=red>
August 19, 2001 2:10:53 PM

little typo there girish...

Itanium does NOT share common roots with X86 CPU's.

It uses a completely different instruction set from X86 processors. That's why X86 apps will need to be emulated with software and run so slowly.

If it had common X86 roots there should be no need for software emulation.

Mark-

When all else fails, throw your computer out the window!!!
August 19, 2001 2:22:03 PM

the Itanium architecture is a superset of the older 32 bit x86 architecture, which was in turn a superset of still older 16 bit architecture.

that is why, in the 127 64 bit GPRs, you can have your old 24 registers - the RAX(EAX(AX(AL:AL))) through RBP(EBP), from r8 to r32.

older register set seems to be lost in the vastly added resources in the Itanium. and yes, it can execute older code but very inefficiently.

Itanium optimisation is a complicated science, and current code is too far from Itanium optimised, especially in its 32 bit mode.

girish

<font color=red>No system is fool-proof. Fools are Ingenious!</font color=red>
August 19, 2001 6:07:17 PM

dude, you have no clue! first, the hammer presently is virtual vaporware i,e. nonexistant! Intel Itanium exists and is performing well.

two, you'd be one dumb newbie if you play a 32-bit game or use 32-bit apps on a IA64 platform.

thus, if you're thinking of buying a hammer just to play 32-bit games then you need your head checked.

also, by the time your dream system comes true there will be a P4 @5+GHz .13micron, costing less than $200, AMD tbirds costing $0.75, geforce5 -$300, dual Mobos - $50, 512 rdram 1200-1600 -$100

so, if your smart enough you'd buy the tbirds @ 50 cents ea. right? LOL!

"<b>AMD/VIA!</b>...you are <i>still</i> the weakest link, good bye!"
August 19, 2001 6:23:49 PM

Post deleted by trak0r
August 20, 2001 4:31:18 AM

For me knowlege Itanium are very complex and still in major developement the next version (merced) ithink will be twice as faster that dont change anything it will take 5 yea before i buy he 64 bit cpu.

Hammer also to me kownlege is a 2*32 bit core and not a true 64 bit cpu that why he run faster the 32 bit apps anyway it wont be avaible until 2 year.
August 20, 2001 6:15:24 AM

ROTFLMAO, Dude come back in a few years when you've got your AMD hammer with 64-bit linux configured(for surfing 64-bit porno sites) and duke nuke'm running in compatibility mode so I can laugh my a$$ off at you once again. LOL!

"<b>AMD/VIA!</b>...you are <i>still</i> the weakest link, good bye!"
August 20, 2001 4:21:25 PM

Quote:
A 32 bit, and a 64 bit.


It's two 32-bit, not one of each, is it not?

And x86-64 cannot run IA64, although you seem to think it can.



<font color=blue>Quarter pounder inside</font color=blue>
<font color=red>Change the Sig of the Week!!!</font color=red>
August 20, 2001 5:49:57 PM

Post deleted by trak0r
August 20, 2001 6:48:49 PM

Quote:
THe hammer is a 64 bit.... AND a 32 Bit platform you piece of [-peep-]. You can use any 64 bit windows


You most certainly did say it could run IA64, whether you meant to or not :) 



<font color=blue>Quarter pounder inside</font color=blue>
<font color=red>Change the Sig of the Week!!!</font color=red>
August 20, 2001 7:05:15 PM

dude, you're like a whinning baby pooping on yourself!

All I'm saying is that If you buy a 64-bit cpu to run 32-bit software then you need your head checked!

even if you do get a 32/64-bit cpu you'll have to wait for 32-bit software to be recompiled to get the most out of your investment and I know you puppies don't want that seeing how you ppl bitched so much about SSE2.

Btw the article you quoted seems to be a bit dated, well researched, bravo!

P.P.S. I never said anything about a IA64 would run on x86-64 bit platform.

"<b>AMD/VIA!</b>...you are <i>still</i> the weakest link, good bye!"
August 20, 2001 7:52:21 PM

Of course the article is dated, it's one of the first to be talking about Hammer being a concept. Nobody is saying it's new, but x86-64 hasn't changed a whole lot since then, same with IA64.

And as for IA64 running on x86-64, he was talking to me, not you.



<font color=blue>Quarter pounder inside</font color=blue>
<font color=red>Change the Sig of the Week!!!</font color=red>
August 21, 2001 5:26:51 PM

Yet another clueless lemming posting on a topic they know nothing about. typical lemming style.

"Intel's attempt to drive the problem ridden and chronically late Itanium into the market suffered another setback as recently as last month"

Itanium is shipping, hammer is not... Mkay

"The Itanium flounders when running 32-bit code (all modern Windows software) as it is optimized for 64-bit VLIW (Very Long Instruction Word) architecture. "

Itamium is a 64bit processor, and its made to run 64bit software specificly. NOT 32BIT. Mkay

"will have two processors on a single die so the Sledgehammer will not just be a fast 64-bit processor, but it will likely also be the fastest processor available running 32-bit software. "

I told you lemmings that the Hammer was dual cores AKA SMP on a chip yet you losers called me a liar and spewed more crap than ever before. its not a true 64bit CPU. Keep dreaming on how its going to perform since you have no sample to even base that statement on. I dont see people spending $10k on a Itanium to run MS word. GG on this "very lemming" post.
August 21, 2001 6:06:33 PM

FUGGER, pull your head out of your ass and listen up for a minute.

I'm going to talk about the <font color=green>home user</font color=green> for a minute here, ok?
How many of these <font color=green>home users</font color=green> will want to buy a new computer and upgrade their CPU all at once? None. Don't even think about saying Itanium isn't for the home user, I'm not talking about Itanium, I'm talking about whatever product Intel brings out for the <font color=green>home user</font color=green>. Am I clear so far? Hope so.

Now, if IA64 runs 32-bit code like crap, then that means that everyone will either have to put a sleeping bag by their computer for the long waiting times, or upgrade all their software to 64-bit at the same time they buy this new, expensive computer.

What's the largest ISP currently? AOL. Why? Because they're "So easy to use", remember? I can't stand AOL, but the average <font color=green>home user</font color=green>, stupid as they may be, likes that. They like minimal fuss, they like having things done for them. These are the people that pay Intel's bills (and yours), not people like us who sit in a computer nerd forum arguing about IA64 vs. x86-64.

Now, none of these <font color=green>home users</font color=green> will want to do that. They'd be far happier to stick with their 32-bit computers than 1) upgrade all their software, or 2) pay out the ass for a new computer and run everything rrreeeeaalll ssssllllloooowwwwww.

If you can prove to me that the <font color=green>home version</font color=green> of IA64 can run 32-bit code at a decent speed, then I'll consider IA64 as a decent solution. Until then, it sucks.



<font color=blue>Quarter pounder inside</font color=blue>
<font color=red>Change the Sig of the Week!!!</font color=red>
August 21, 2001 6:52:15 PM

I need to opologize for all the confusion here. It seems some people would like to go over the edge when they post, and some just like to inform and correct. My intention was to inform of the hammer, and what it is capable for average user. when people decide to upgrade, they want to spend little amount, and be able to have the best of both worlds at there finger tips. I hope, really hope that IA64 architecture does not take off, and become the standard! That means that all the computetion will be in Intel's hands , once again. All these cool prices your seeing, is a direct result of competitors, like AMD, stepping up to the plate. I seriously doubt AMD will try to copy IA64 into their processors because they wanted to go with what works! x86-64. But, they will adapt if Intel wins, and drives the market up once more :( 

whatever. you guys know exactly what I mean. I spend $300, and get a hammer that runs 32 bit better then current athlons, and I get a 64 bit that runs the best at 'x86-64 64 bit instructions' (not itaniums radical, and monopolizing spec's, called IA64). OR I could go and spend $1200 for and 'IA64 processor' to run my legacy software (like a P3), but to run all the proggies that was customized for the IA64 (be it windows or whatever). The futute is pretty clear I think. Itunium will strictly settle into the server, suppercomputer market, and there will be a P5, that works on a x86-64 platform, but will not have sufficeient 32 bit support to compete with its own predeccesor, the P4. well.. those are my last thoughts for this forum.

goodbye.

Tr@k0r.

P.s. I will not read, nor reply to anything else said in this forum. I do not have the time.
August 21, 2001 7:09:14 PM

AHGAHAHAHAHAHA, Home users are not going to buy a Itanium.

10K for the machine and even more for the applications...

Home users.... ROFLMAO

I can forsee a mad rush on SV1 Cray supercomputer to run 32bit apps. its a supercomputer and it should run 32bit apps right? well since a 386SX can beat SV1 at 32bit apps they should just junk the SV1 and buy used 386's huh?

REPEAT, Itanium is not made for 32bit (IA64) or home users. get over it already.
August 21, 2001 7:18:06 PM

I really couldn't give a damn if the Hammer series would be 64bit or not. The only reason I would buy a Hammer would be for it's 32bit capabilities.

--
It's Princess Leia, the yodel of my life. Give me my sweater back or I'll play the guitar.
August 21, 2001 7:25:20 PM

Speaking of getting shot down, Hypertransport was shot down in flames as a PCI standard. =P

On the brigher side
http://www.osc.edu/

Out in the Midwestern U.S., the Ohio Supercomputer Center (OSC) and SGI have put together a new cluster system using the Itanium-based Silicon Graphics 750 system. The system makes use of a whopping 146 processors and will allow Ohio researchers to study everything from quark-antiquark attraction and radiation transfer in astrophysical outflows to simulations of photosynthesis components and matter in the early universe. The latest Silicon Graphics 750 system has 292GB memory, 428GFLOPS peak performance for double-precision computations, and 856GFLOPS peak performance for single-precision computations

You can visit your beloved Hammer at www.simics.com
Did I mention its a software simulator/macromedia demo?
When AMD has a working hammer sample the world will know, untill then you got alot of wasted bandwidth.
August 21, 2001 7:26:48 PM

Let me put it another way, would you spend 10K for a home PC? I didnt think so.
August 21, 2001 8:20:46 PM

Me:
Quote:
Don't even think about saying Itanium isn't for the home user, I'm not talking about Itanium


You:
Quote:
AHGAHAHAHAHAHA, Home users are not going to buy a Itanium.


FUGGER, time and time again you prove how big an idiot you really are. When are you going to give up?



<font color=blue>Quarter pounder inside</font color=blue>
<font color=red>Change the Sig of the Week!!!</font color=red>
August 21, 2001 8:22:02 PM

Exactly. So what 64-bit <font color=red>HOME SOLUTION</font color=red> is Intel going to pull out of their ass to compete with Hammer?



<font color=blue>Quarter pounder inside</font color=blue>
<font color=red>Change the Sig of the Week!!!</font color=red>
August 21, 2001 8:35:06 PM

i thought itanium was for servers... are people saying they want the itanium for home users or suggesting it can be for home users? lol that is kinda funny ...

there is a reason why the chip alone cost 4000 dollars... anyway why would anyone want the itanium? It is super hot and those will melt faster then the t-birds lol. Even with a die shrink heat is still an issue.

amd's version of the 64bit processor you have to admit is a good introduction anyway instead of going from 32 to 64 like. think of it like this, 32 -> 32/64 -> 64 where intel is 32 -> 64 ... ya know? get what i'm saying.

Either way intel continues to innovate while AMD just perfects current technologies (hence x86-64 being the fastest 32 bit processor ever?). Which is all good i guess. Depends on your point of view.

I can see where the hammer would be ok for power home users and small servers. And the itanium for the large servers using only 64bit software.

That must cost a good buck! have you seen prices on 64bit cards compared to 32bit cards? a huge jump. dam imagin 64bit software... *shakes head*



<A HREF="http://www.anandtech.com/mysystemrig.html?id=9933" target="_new"> My Rig </A>
August 21, 2001 9:12:25 PM

Why would you want a 64-bit chip for home ooc?

Althons and Pentiums are just melted rock. Who’s rock is better? Who cares, let’s play some games
August 21, 2001 9:13:05 PM

oh I see where Fugger is coming from. He's thinking short term while you are thinking long term. He's saying that the home user won't see 64 BIT which is true in the beginning, but sooner or later it will get to our level of availability. I think 32 BIT compatibility isn't so much of an issue on the initial release of these CPU's but rather one that should be addressed when the CPU's start heading toward the workstation/homeuser market.

To <b>HELL</b> with your damned cookie.... :mad:  ptooo!! :mad: 
Change the signature of the week
August 21, 2001 9:23:20 PM

ROFLMAO

Hmmm...I worry about you, Wolverinero



<font color=blue>Quarter pounder inside</font color=blue>
<font color=red>Change the Sig of the Week!!!</font color=red>
August 21, 2001 11:16:27 PM

fatburger, I don't get it! why do you ppl insist on talking about IA64 as a decent or even a solution for the regular home user.

why not criticize Sun or other 64bit *only* chip manufacturers? there are many companies with 64 bit cpu's and none of them targets their sh!t at the home users!

why is it that when Intel decides to do a 64-bit cpu (to COMPETE with these companies!) you ppl bring up 64 bit computing? and critizise a 64-bit chip for not doing 32-bit????

why not harrang Sun for their costly workstations?(suns solution for 32bit compatability is to offer a card with a p3 on it for extra bucks!)

so Itanium does not run 32b code as well, so what? I got news for you! it's not a 32bit cpu! it's not for you, period!

you ppl are so clueless it's hilarious, now when you go back to school(Junior high, no doubt) and someone mentions 64 bit you think Intel or AMD? get a f**k'n clue!

the fact is if you buy a AMD hammer x86-64(which will be a more costly investment than 32-bit offerings from either Intel or AMD) and load it up with your best 32 bit software,hoping, waiting for 64-bit software(waiting for dukenukem64!, it's taken them almost 4yrs to do a 32 bit version, LOL!) your hammer will be outdated and outclassed shortly there after! LOL! give me a f**k'n break!

"<b>AMD/VIA!</b>...you are <i>still</i> the weakest link, good bye!"
August 21, 2001 11:32:42 PM

Compete with hammer for what? 64-bit home market? There is no such market for the foreseeable future. (At least a few years.) Where there is no market, there is no need for a product. 64-bit high-end server market? The Itanium handles this well. High-end servers do not run 32-bit software. Look to the Alpha and other 64-bit processors. This market does not require 32-bit support.

The 64-bit home market is entirely non-existent and will remain that way for a few years to come. The main benefit is access to more memory. Home users haven't even yet come close to hitting the 32-bit memory limit on their machines. When home-targetted motherboards offer support for 4GB of memory and many people are actually installing the full 4GB and complaining about not having enough memory, then a 64-bit home market will open up. CPUs targetted for such a market have not been disclosed publicly and will not resemble anything currently in existence.

-Raystonn


= The views stated herein are my personal views, and not necessarily the views of my employer. =
August 22, 2001 11:00:03 AM

People who need 64bit cpu's would want to be able to run 32 bit apps as well, we all know about the mad ass tribes games the university students play on their supercomputers
;-)

~Matisaro~
"Friends don't let friends buy Pentiums"
~Tbird1.3@1.55~
August 22, 2001 3:30:04 PM

Quote:
The 64-bit home market is entirely non-existent and will remain that way for a few years to come.

<font color=red><b>I'M NOT TALKING ABOUT NOW, I'M TALKING ABOUT IN A FEW YEARS!!!!!!!!</b></font color=red>

Geez, get that through your heads, people! How is IA64 going to be so radically different that it'll magically run 32-bit code, that's what I'm asking. I agree, Itanium doesn't need to run 32-bit code. But how is IA64 going to change so much in a few years, that the processor they bring out will be able to run 32-bit? I understand that's confidential, that's fine. I just don't see it happening, at least not easily.

Maybe rcf should reverse his statement. "What will Intel be using in 10 years? Well it's x86-64, of course."

I have nothing against Intel as a company. They're driven by the wrong people (marketing), which needs to change. But without them, we'd still be using CPUs at 200MHz or so.

The P4 is far crappier than it should be (not including Northwood), but that's another story...



<font color=blue>Quarter pounder inside</font color=blue>
<font color=red>Change the Sig of the Week!!!</font color=red>
August 22, 2001 3:43:15 PM

No i'm serious, i mean are the benefits really so radical as to make a 64-bit chip look that impressive? I mean the way i see it is the hardware always has to be ahead of the software right? But the question is, how much? Aren't current chips and video cards way ahead enough of existing and even 2 years from now applications that they can slow down in technology jumps?

Althons and Pentiums are just melted rock. Who’s rock is better? Who cares, let’s play some games
August 22, 2001 4:35:00 PM

Why to people keep bringing up
1) Itanium, and
2) Time

Neither matters to this conversation. I'm debating x86064 vs. IA64, not Itanium vs. Hammer. And time is irrelavent (to some extent), because we're talking about the technologies, not the exact chips.



<font color=blue>Quarter pounder inside</font color=blue>
<font color=red>Change the Sig of the Week!!!</font color=red>
August 22, 2001 4:56:27 PM

Quote:
Why to people keep bringing up
1) Itanium, and
2) Time

people are confusing themselves between technologies and processors. whatever the technology whatever the processor we should really be discussing about 64 bit technology, the IA64 architecture vs. x86-64 and not Itaniums and Hammers. that will be later when we see the hammer in flesh and blood and can really set a match between the two.

just gimme a break. lets talk what tech is what and what is not. how will it fare in future and how will it do in homes, offices and servers.

say whats IA-64
say whats x86-64
say whats better
say whats lame
say whats going into the future
say whats in
say whats out

girish

<font color=red>No system is fool-proof. Fools are Ingenious!</font color=red>
August 22, 2001 6:11:34 PM

Yes, exactly. I just want to see what Intel is going to do to bring 64-bit to the home (when the time comes), to compete with what AMD already has on the drawing board.



<font color=blue>Quarter pounder inside</font color=blue>
<font color=red>Change the Sig of the Week!!!</font color=red>
!