Who cares about Xeons and Itanics?
They're no match to Opterons. 8)
[code:1:ad5223bd66]
Actually a 4-way IA-64 will have greater performance than my 4-way Opteron 270. (Yes, Even with both at 2 GHz).
IA-64 will also scale to 512/1024 processor designs.
Opteron K8 cores are only 3-issue cores, IA-64 cores are 11-issue and use an even shorter pipeline (better for performance than long pipeline) than the Opteron K8.
Conroe, Merom, Woodcrest, Kentville will all be using 4-issue cores.
More IA-64 cores will fit on an equal amount of silicon than Opteron (K8) cores... IA-64 it just needs more L1/L2/L3 cache to scale better IPC wise on existing applications. Data caches can remain the same size however, but may aswell scale both.
Transistor for transistor the IA-64 cores FPU is significantly more powerful, even at a fraction of the clock speed, compared to my Opteron K8 FPU.
It is known, that K8L is still only going to be a 3-issue, per core, design, it'll just permit 4 cores at 65nm, more cache, etc, and scale to 45nm if AMD want.
Considering how many IA-64 cores will fit in a 65nm and 45nm design.... well it should speak for itself by now.
Most IA-64 processors you're thinking of are only 180nm or 130nm, which as such have 1/4 to 1/16 the number of transistors 'at equal production cost'. When they move to 65nm with 2x - 8x the number of cores per processor what do you expect to happen ?
Intel want 100's of cores per processor, IA-64 was designed to do just that, only it is 5 years ahead of its time.
AMD now have IA-64 engineers.
HP have ties to both companies.
Surely you see what this means.
[/code:1:ad5223bd66]
Yeah, once something is 100% bullzhit is it impossible to add anymore without increasing the size / mass of forementioned bullzhit.
😛
Do bear in mind my home machine is an Opteron 270 with 4 cores, and I am ready to admit IA-64 is going to offer higher performing processor cores than K8L, just some people go into denial as they can't handle the truth.
😛
(Remember to view at 1:1, not zoomed out to one screen).
Sure AMD K10 design may change all that, by incorperating both x64 (AMD64) and IA-64 (AMD varient thereof) within on 65nm, 45nm or 32nm processor. (Perhaps I have said to much for people to handle with this one
😳 )
AMD shared (x86_64, or just x64) AMD64 to Intel, so they now have Intel EM64T (basically the same instruction extentions).
Intel are now 'sharing' IA-64 with AMD. (AMD have HP/Intel IA-64 engineers over there right now).
So will you say AMD suck when they have both x64 (AMD64) and IA-64 processor cores within one CPU, because it was based on Itanium ?
They are getting a slice of a US$10 billion dollar investment, and it is costing them little in comparison to get in on the multiple cores cores per processor action.
AMD64 to get Intel EM64T, and in exchange they get access to Intel IA-64 and 'in on' a significant investment, possibly the largest IT CPU related investment in the history of humankind. At least for the next 50-100 years.
Tip of the day: When
rettihSlluB click