Man, what are you smoking talking about 64 bit architecture having to emulate 32 bit architecture? Remember way back when the 386 came out with a 32 bit architecture? Before that everything was 16 bit. Yet did a 286 EVER run 16 bit software faster than a 386? Did it? NEVER!
Why? Because you don't have to emulate a lower bit architecture. That's absurd and anyone who believes that doesn't know jack. Just because a register holds 64 bit numbers doesn't mean that it can't hold a 32 bit number just as easily.
I do think that Intel is going wacko with their Itanium design though. As a programmer I don't even want to think about trying to write software that doesn't have to execute sequentially. Ugh. As if my job isn't hard enough already. But if Intel can just make a 64 bit version of the P4, AMD's hammers won't stand a snowball's chance in silicon hell.
And I agree that Intel was pretty stupid for castrating their floating point processing ability. And that any software written specifically for that good old standard will run better on an AMD chip. But any software that does get written for SSE2 standards is going to make AMD's chips all look like crap except for their hammers. And since SSE2 is going to support floating point operations, except for purely scientific software and supreme graphic rendering software that require exceptionally accurate numbers, people will be using the SSE2 for most floating point operations. Which means that the majority of future software will scream on the P4 because it won't be stuck using that crappy floating point processing Intel put into the P4.
Which means that in the future AMD will really have a very small market indeed for places where their non-hammer chips will perform in any way better than P4 chips.
As I see it, Intel's P4 has struck AMD hard because ALL of AMD's striving right now is to break into the market against Intel's P3s and Celerons. And Intel's P4 is going to smack AMD's plans down hard because the P4 has sooooooooo much more potential than the P3(which is already at it's limits).
All AMD has left to stand on now is their hammer chips. Right now both chip companies are left with their last cards played. Intel has the P4s. AMD has their hammers. And the true test of who will come out on top is going to be processor speed. So unles AMD's current roadmaps are a hoax, AMD is screwed because Intel is finally getting their act together and providing their products on-time and in-mass. And Intel's products are going to leave AMD in the dust according to roadmaps.
I think that the decline of Intel is finally reversing and we'll see the chip giant proving it's superiority once and for all against AMD.
And I would like to say that Tom's review of the P4, just like virtually everyone else's, is biased for AMD. Maybe they didn't mean to, but it's true. Tom's has proven that SDRAM has lower latencies than RDRAM. And anyone knows that software written to use optimizations is going to run faster on the chip it's optimized for than it will on a chip that doesn't have full optimization support yet.
So it's obvious given just those two things that Intel's P4 should do worse under the testing conditions that were used. I was surprised the P4 did so well in Quake3 and can only guess that it is because of SSE1 optimization code.
Now, I know it isn't fair to blame Tom's for this, since there is no DDR SDRAM P4 support yet and there is no SSE2 optimized software yet. So finding a FAIR test right now is next to impossible.
But Tom's DIDN'T make this obvious to the reader. They DIDN'T repeatedly express this so that the reader KNOWS that any current tests done on the P4 just aren't going to show it's true potential.
It was mentioned, but I don't think it was mentioned enough and expressed thoroughly enough to really give Intel their due. So I do blame them for that and say it was indeed a biased review if for that reason alone.
Frankly, Tom's has been biasing a lot of their reviews lately. They USED to provide unbiased reviews. But for some reason they changed. Maybe it isn't much of a bias, but it's still there.
But I still like thier reviews because they do provide a lot of information and it's easy to negate the bias in which the reviews are written to pick out the facts. So I'm still an avid Tom's fan. But I wish they'd go back to being completely unbiased.
And if anyone thinks that a P4 sounds cool now. Just think what it'll be like when it upgrades to a 133MHZ bus, a .13 micron engraving, and has DDR SDRAM support. (And even better, if Intel also improved the floating point processing to at least two channels, if not four dual-pumped channels.)
- Anything can be fixed with duct tape, a swiss army knife, and WD-40.