64bit and even 128bit microprocessors exist for more than 20 years now, you know. It only wasn't needed in a desktop until recently. All actual x86 processors with 64bit instructions processing capabilities are actually running with 48bit really. No need for full 64bit yet, so it's cheaper to produce those 48bit chips. Itanium came first than AMD64, and Microsoft had actually finished porting Windows to run on top of it. But since AMDs x86_64 architecture is backward compatible with x86 and the old operating systems and all the needed software that wasn't ported to the IA64 yet, it just fall into disuse.
Last edited by jntesteves; 09-25-2009 at 03:27 PM.
About the article. To me, it still looks like the AMD Phenom II is the best bang for the buck. Some of the most prominent differences in those graphs seems to be related to other hardware, like the SSD Intel used for their tests. Looking forward to see Michael's results with the same hardware and the updated BIOS. For now I remain agnostic to these results.
And if you just had a Phenom II X4 in there it would be really nice to have in this comparison.
Here are few of them from muhdzamri.blogspot.com :
And again, 64bit proccessor even Nintendo64 had. But AMD's design was the big leap, because it extended x86 processors to gain 64 bit capability rather than design a new stricly 64 bit processor, just like dozens of others had made in the past.1. Allows end users to run their existing installed base of 32-bit applications and operating systems at peak performance, while providing a migration path that is 64-bit capable.
2. HyperTransport technology - provides a scalable bandwidth interconnect between processors, I/O subsystems, and other chipsets. This feature is not available in Itanium.
3. Integrated DDR DRAM Memory Controller - this memory is integrated in CPU itself. For Itanium, the memory is outside of CPU. According to Mr Mohan,Itanium introduced FSB (Front Side Bus) to connect CPU to external RAM. This increases latency.
4. Low-Power Processors - the AMD Opteron processor offers industry-leading performance per watt making it an ideal solution for rack-dense 1U servers or blades in datacenter environments as well as cooler, quieter workstation designs. This is a critical factor for HPC environment.
The bottomline is Opteron is more scalable than Itanium in terms of speed. If we add more CPUs, the Opteron speed will increase as opposed to Itanium. To make things worse, the bandwidth between CPUs will be divided evenly.
These are distinctive features on AMD Opteron that made it suitable for SUN to bundle it for their server products. Although Intel is popular, for technical people, popularity is nothing. The technical side of it is more important and pricewise it is cheaper too.
Last edited by Apopas; 09-25-2009 at 06:39 AM.