Intel vs Sun?

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
ummmm NO!

different on so many levels
architecture
sales
users

i suppose you could compare the IA-64 with some sun untra sparc... but even then they are quite different.

Religious wars are 2 groups of people fighting over who has the best imaginary friend.
 
The SUN 64bit UltraSparc processor has been around for about 5 years. Itanium has been around for about 5 weeks.

The first release of the IA-64 architecture is really for the Dell's & Hewlett-Compaqard's to practice building solutions on the new architecture rather than actually selling alot of machines.

Intel tried to put up some performance comparisions against Sun but really had to manipulate the numbers to make Itanium look good. This is not to put down the IA-64 architecture, it simply is a first attempt and the real comparisons can be made once the McKinley core arrives.

2002 will be the learning phase for IA-64 as people learn how to make the most of Intel's 64bit solution (it's more than just a re-compile). 2003 will be a great year for power processing with IA-64, UltraSPARC, Power5.

Until 2003 Sun's 5 years experience lead will keep them well ahead of the pace. An important thing to note is that the individual CPU is becoming far less important and it is the overall architecture that is important in delivering real performance. Compare the role of the UltraSparcIII in the E15K (upto 106 processors) to the Itanium, they are still in different worlds.



<font color=blue> Smoke me a Chip'er ... I'll be back in the Morgan </font color=blue> 😱
 
The only similar thing about Intel CPUs and Sun CPUs is that they both run Linux!

"If you teach a child to read, then he or her will be able to pass a literacy test" - George W.
 
What is the exactly the "64" means between Sun 64 bit and IA-64? I believe both Intel and Sun's CPU use 64-bit data bus. I knew Solaris is a 64-bit OS and MS is coming a 64-bit XP. Is the Linux a 64 bit OS?

Thanks for the reply
 
What is the exactly the "64" means between Sun 64 bit and IA-64? I believe both Intel and Sun's CPU use 64-bit data bus. I knew Solaris is a 64-bit OS and MS is coming a 64-bit XP. Is the Linux a 64 bit OS?

Thanks for the reply
 
Linux running on a 64-bit CPU is indeed a 64-bit O/S. The "64" in Sun 64-bit and IA-64 both refer to addressable memory (4.2 billion squared vs. 4.2 billion) and register size. BTW, Intel CPUs have actually been using a 64-bit FSB since the Pentium--IA64 is just the first Intel CPU that's fully 64-bit.

Kelledin

"/join #hackerz. See the Web. DoS interesting people."
 
Hi,
Does any web do the comparison on Sun and Intel's machine performance with the same Linux OS?

Thanks,
 
Yes, WinXp will have an itanium version. But it will be as expensive as heck, and Linux was ported to IA-64 long before Windows.

"If you teach a child to read, then he or her will be able to pass a literacy test" - George W.
 
Here is a question, wont all the device drivers need to be rewritten for windows xpia64 and if so what good is windows when most devices wont be supported for some time.

~Matisaro~
"The Cash Left In My Pocket,The BEST Benchmark"
~Tbird1.3@1.5~
 
Win XP 64-bit is coming for the Itatium.
Click to expand...

A while back (just before Itanium appeared on PriceWatch), I saw an article with someone running an Itanium with WinXP 64-bit (this was before WinXP RC1, too). I posted it here, you could probably find the link to the article if you really wanted.

<font color=green>I post so you don't have to!
9/11 - RIP</font color=green>
 
Since Itanium is a server processor, you won't see it in any desktop. Since Compaq and HP, and maybe a few others, will be selling servers with Itanium, they'll provide the necessary drivers for their hardware. You won't have to worry about your GeForce not working with Itanium, because it's not meant to be a desktop processor, and it won't be one soon either. When there's a mainstream IA-64 processor out there, there'll be the drivers. Just like when people started using Windows 95 instead of 3.11 and Windows 2000 instead of Windows 95 and so forth.
 
Its a crapload of work to convert drivers to 64 bit. It took the LInux community about 2 years to make the kernel (and drivers) 64 bit clean.

"If you teach a child to read, then he or her will be able to pass a literacy test" - George W.
 
Sure, it's a lot of work, but there's a big difference between the Linux Community and Microsoft when it comes to getting products out and working. Not that I'm saying one is better than the other, but one is working free, while the other is working for $$$, so Microsoft has teams of people working on all of that, so by the time XP 64 rolls out, there'll be plenty of drivers. Just look at the drivers included with Windows 2000/XP. It's a butt load.
 
What I am saying is there is xp pro and xp home, and they are similar, if microsoft is making xp(the same xp we all will run etc) run 64 bit, it will have to support some devices.(even servers have videocards). Will microsoft write all the new drives, or will the vendors themselves?

~Matisaro~
"The Cash Left In My Pocket,The BEST Benchmark"
~Tbird1.3@1.5~
 
~ Since Itanium is a server processor, you won't see it in any desktop. ~

There is nothing unreasonable about having 64bit on the desktop. You can buy a SunBlade 100 desktop 500Mhz 64bit machine from Sun for USD995.

The only reason we don't have 64bit PC's now is that Intel made such a hash of delivering their 64bit solution.

<font color=blue> Smoke me a Chip'er ... I'll be back in the Morgan </font color=blue> 😱
 
I never said we weren't going to see 64bit computing in desktops, I'm talking about the Itanium. The Itanium I'm positive you won't see it in any desktops, maybe some decendents of it, but not the Itanium. Well, we might, (Like what happened with the Pentium Pro), but it's still not likely that we'll see one of these in a desktop anytime soon.
 
I'm sure it'll be like Win2K and XP, some are written by Microsoft, like Standard VGA, IDE, mouse and stuff, but most will be written by the vendors. I don't see the big deal with this. Vendors didn't seem to have a problem writing drivers for Windows 95 when it came out, as apposed to the 16 bit drivers they had for Windows 3.1. So it shouldn't be a big deal going from 32 to 64 bits.

And another thing, XP 64 will almost certainly be XP Server, not Pro or Home (especially not home).<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by lucol on 10/02/01 03:34 PM.</EM></FONT></P>
 
It was easier for the Linux community to write drivers, because it was all open source. And on't hate on Linux, its a remarkably full featured product, and for servers, its second to none. The desktop isnt that bad either, but its a good deal less user friendly then Windows, but I think thats a good thing.

"If you teach a child to read, then he or her will be able to pass a literacy test" - George W.
 
Au contraire, I saw on HP's site, you can buy Itanium workstations, albeit for more money that I will have for some time

Charlie

Democracy Bernad, it must be stopped!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom