Topic: How many of you P/C gurus think Intel will release a 64 bit chip?

[JMM]

No worries Bonk, I have been guilty of running through threads too fast before as well.

I do not know a lot about the P/C stuff, I just looked at my Sony VAIO and saw it was exactly what I needed, bought it then ran like hades for EAW and told Leda I'm ready to go home and play SFC2! As you can tell, my older machine could not handle it so I was filled with glee at having a P4 instead of P2, hehehehehehe, not only that, but my brother is a P/C guy and I HAD a machine faster than his for once.

I guess my question is this, will a 64 bit chip be the "latest thing" or next "step" for us personal users?  

[Bonk]

Personally, I don't think so. My feeling is that it will remain in the professional realm until games are developed for the platform at which time the pc market will have enough demand. It seems to me that game hardware requirements are pretty much what is responsible for driving performance on the pc platform. Perhaps there are already 64 bit games out there or in development and that's why AMD is pushing it's 64bit athlon.  I feel that the console gaming market now will always outperform the PC for gaming applications because of the use of asics and fpgas built explicitly for the job. If anything is pushing the pc platform to go 64 bit its competition from gaming consoles.  Once enough 64 bit applications suited to the consumer market (mostly games) are produced then I expect it to be a feature that consumers will look for in a pc.  For now, I expect other more immediately useful gee-whiz features to be the "next big thing".  I could be wrong however, of course, I hadn't even realised the Itanuim-2 was out till I went looking!  

[IKV Nemesis D7L]

Quote:
They did, some time ago: IntelŪ ItaniumŪ processor , and the newer: IntelŪ ItaniumŪ 2

See also: ItaniumŪ 2-based solutions from HP , the key partner.

edit:  this one looks "nice", or one of these would make a sweet server, or patch 64 of them together with  this and you could make a real monster... for a maxed out system total of 4096 processors, 32768 GB memory, 12228 PCI slots, occupying a mere 305 cubic yards...  one would have to be very rich and have a lot of space however, might as well get into the Cray market at that point!

All of this is dependent on application availability of course. This OpenVMS for the HP Integrity series looks interesting...

OOPS! I just noticed Hobbesmaster mentioned the Itanium a few posts back, anyway here's a little extra info I guess.  

Yes the Itanium is 64 bit.  But it is not a PC processor.  Intel does not want it to be in the PC market.  It is aimed at servers that by x86 standards are "big".  They target the Sun Sparc and IBM 64bit Power PC server space not the PC,

It is also pretty much a flop in the marketplace.  Too expensive and it runs x86 (PC programs) in an emulation mode that is notoriously slow.  They have had a very difficult time ramping up speeds.

Here is a link to some Itanium 2 prices.  They are pretty shocking, $2294 to $10,4900.

A link to Opteron prices.  $229 - $1641

A link to Athlon 64 prices.  $239 - $990

All links are to the same site.  

In my opinion AMD is pushing the Athlon64/Opteron to 64 bit to prevent a patent protected 64 bit chip taking over the PC marketplace effectively destroying competition and especially AMD.   I am sure that AMD would love to be in a situation where Intel must follow them and they can be the company getting the premium prices for their chips rather than being the follower with Intel reaping the cream of the market.

This may be the time that Intel loses its ability to dominate the PC hardware market just as IBM did when Compaq was the first to pust ahead to using the 32bit 80386 chip while IBM was holding back to maximize profits from the 16bit 80286 based designs.  Intel has tried to hold back x86 so that it does not compete with the Itanium line.   That has left an opening.  AMD is trying to use that to achieve leadership.  For years the phrase was "no one was ever fired for buying IBM", Intel has taken that position and AMD wants it.    

[JMM]

Very true Nemesis, if people read the history of AMD and Intel in the beginning years, many of the founders worked together for another company before, and the rivalry is great indeed. I would love to see AMD be a huge success as they are a MAJOR Austin, Texas employer, and we all care about jobs in our states that we live in, just like we all care about American products and jobs as a whole.  

[Bonk]

Good point, and an important disitnction that the Athlon 64 and Itanium are geared for two different markets. I was also aware of the prices - egads, one would need deep pockets! I hate to think of the cost of the superdome cluster I outlined above - it would be insane!

Quote:
 Intel has tried to hold back x86 so that it does not compete with the Itanium line.

Hmm, interesting theory.  I would be tempted to agree if not for the fact that they are intended for different markets.  As you said.    HP sells considerably more Blade servers (filled with P3s, PMs and P4s) than SuperDomes and I'm sure they're quite happy with the results, though intel may not be, but I'm sure they're just as happy to move the product anyway.

I guess the main difference is probably that the Itanium is built for parallel applications (EPIC) and the AMD 64 intended mainly for single processor installations (therein likely lies much of the price difference too...)  

[IKV Nemesis D7L]

Quote:
Very true Nemesis, if people read the history of AMD and Intel in the beginning years, many of the founders worked together for another company before, and the rivalry is great indeed. I would love to see AMD be a huge success as they are a MAJOR Austin, Texas employer, and we all care about jobs in our states that we live in, just like we all care about American products and jobs as a whole.  

The Fairchildren.  

For those that don't recognize them, Fairchild was one of the companies that pretty much started the semiconductor industry.  It was also one of the first companies to move into the area now known as Silicon Valley.  Intel, AMD and  other companies were formed by people who were among the founders and early employers of Fairchild who then went off on their own to create companies of their own.   Naturally they became known as the Fairchildren.

   

[Bonk]

True, domestic presence is good for all those reasons and more.  It's funny, I remember using quality AMD SCSI  on intel processor systems before I ever heard of an AMD processor.  (That was before Adaptec scooped the SCSI market - how, I'm still not sure)  Little did I know that AMD would turn into a serious competitor for intel in the processor market. I have noticed less and less of a disparity in processor performance with the later AMD processors, and would even consider buying one now.  (Even after having had to deal with waaaay to many limp-wristed K6s and K62s over the years).  I have always been of the opinion that saving $20 on the price of the processor when buying a computer will simply cost you more in the long run. Perhaps not so anymore?  

[JMM]

Let's not forget that many AMD chips can be overclocked safely, something Intel frowns upon. AMD actually SAVED their customers money thus allowing them faster performance should they have chosen to do so. I'm no P/C guru but I would have gladly paid to have an AMD chip safely overclocked and configured. I'll admit, I use Pentiums, but yes, I may very well give AMD a try as Sony VAIOS use both companies chips now.    

[IKV Nemesis D7L]

Quote:
Hmm, interesting theory.  I would be tempted to agree if not for the fact that they are intended for different markets.  As you said.    HP sells considerably more Blade servers (filled with P3s, PMs and P4s) than SuperDomes and I'm sure they're quite happy with the results, though intel may not be, but I'm sure they're just as happy to move the product anyway.

I guess the main difference is probably that the Itanium is built for parallel applications (EPIC) and the AMD 64 intended mainly for single processor installations (therein likely lies much of the price difference too...)  

The Athlon 64 is an Opteron with fewer hypertransport links and the multiprocessing turned off or built without them (I don't know which).   Fewer hypertransport links makes the motherboard cheaper and reduces the pin count on the CPU also reducing costs.

The Opteron targets both Xeon and Itanium though Intel tries to pretend otherwise.  The Opteron has 3 lines, 1xx for single CPU machines (the Athlon 64 FX51 is a top line 1xx rebranded for gamers), the 2xx for dual CPU (replaces the Athlon MP) and the 8xx for up to 8 CPU machines.  The 8xx target above the Xeon line and with 64 bit and the ability to competently run both 32bit and 64bit software at the same time it puts less of a bite on the wallet to make the move up to 64 bit.   The 8xx series target squarely in the Itanium zone and is cheaper.

The Opteron is already being used in Supercomputers with thousands of CPUs, just like the Xeon and Itanium.  HP is actually not happy selling so few Itaniums as they put a fortune into the development and essentially sacrificed their own CPU line for the Itanium (PA-RISC ?).  They expected a much bigger Itanium market, especially since the Itanium has been on the market for years now.

Part of the reason the 386 was so successful was that it could work well with both 16bit and 32bit software so you didn't have to abandon all that you had to gain the advantages of 32bit.

 How soon would you buy a 64bit home system if you could no longer run any of your existing software?  Buy the system and replace all your software at the same time and abandon any software that is not available in 64bit versions (no SFC2 ...nooo!).  Windows 64bit version will run both at the same time, Linux does already.

Many companies face the same situation with the Itanium.  Dump all your existing 32bit software and pay extortionate prices for the Itanium versions (due to low volumes).  Rewrite all your in house software for Itanium.   That or stick with 32bit and limitations on some software that needs 64bit.  Many are staying 32bit others when migrating to 64 bit skip Itanium and go to more established platforms from other companies.  

Some companies are now beginning to go Opteron and Athlon64 for the reasons I have mentioned.    

[Bonk]

I new the Itanium was never very successful, I expected it to be more of a big deal, then it kinda just disappeared. (I didn't even know the Itanium-2 was out, where was the promotion?) I also expected a more prominent appearance by the G5, but it seems to have fizzled as well. It looks like AMD's minimalist approach may be the winning strategy. Thanks for the good explanation of your view of the market, it sounds pretty accurate and up to date.

A bit OT: I expect at some point a quantum leap (literally) in computers, I am fascinated with the function and potential of quantum computing, oohhhh to work in one of those IBM labs.... the applications of NMR never cease to amaze me.  I get a charge out of the "qubit" terminology used too, for some reason it reminds me of the old "Qbert" arcade game from the eighties, (you know the one where the little round guy had run up and down the "3-D" stairs avoiding danger?) it makes me smile...  

[IKV Nemesis D7L]

Quote:
I new the Itanium was never very successful, I expected it to be more of a big deal, then it kinda just disappeared. (I didn't even know the Itanium-2 was out, where was the promotion?) I also expected a more prominent appearance by the G5, but it seems to have fizzled as well. It looks like AMD's minimalist approach may be the winning strategy. Thanks for the good explanation of your view of the market, it sounds pretty accurate and up to date.

A bit OT: I expect at some point a quantum leap (literally) in computers, I am fascinated with the function and potential of quantum computing, oohhhh to work in one of those IBM labs.... the applications of NMR never cease to amaze me.  I get a charge out of the "qubit" terminology used too, for some reason it reminds me of the old "Qbert" arcade game from the eighties, (you know the one where the little round guy had run up and down the "3-D" stairs avoiding danger?) it makes me smile...  

The costs for various chips is associated with the transistor count.   Among other things more transitors more chance for an error making the chip scrap.

Itanium 2 - 210 million to 400 million transistors depending on cache size
Pentium4 Xeon - 169 million Tranistors
Pentium4EE - 169 million Tranistors
Pentium4 - 55 million Tranistors
Pentium4 Celeron - 42 million Tranistors
Pentium III - 28 million transistors

Opteron - 106 million Tranistors
Athlon 64FX - 106 million Tranistors
Athlon 64  - 67 million Tranistors
Athlon XP - 37.5 to 54 million Tranistors depending on cache size
Duron  - 25 million Tranistors
Athlon original - 22 million

 

[IKV Nemesis D7L]

Link to story

Limited Quote from story.

Quote:
Intel plans to demonstrate a 64-bit revamp of its Xeon and Pentium processors in mid-February--an endorsement of a major rival's strategy and a troubling development for Intel's Itanium chip.

The demo, which follows the AMD64 approach of Intel foe Advanced Micro Devices, is expected at the Intel developer conference, Feb. 17 through 19 in San Francisco, according to sources familiar with the plan. Intel had code-named the technology Yamhill but now calls it CT, sources said.

   

[ActiveX]

Quote:
My feeling is that it will remain in the professional realm until games are developed for the platform at which time the pc market will have enough demand.

I am looking to do just that...

Currently have no funding though, so my game developement company will prolly be awhile off yet...

But I have 4 products already planned out...

[E_Look]

Quote:
 

... How soon would you buy a 64bit home system if you could no longer run any of your existing software?  Buy the system and replace all your software at the same time and abandon any software that is not available in 64bit versions (no SFC2 ...nooo!)...  

You fashion-crazy young whippersnappers!  I've had to give up my beloved SFC1 because I "upgraded" to XP (on an Athlon 64)!

Oh, I'm just kidding, though it doesn't run (well) anymore (ask Pestalence), but you're right, the only reason why I went with the Athlon 64 over the Athlon XP or Pentium 4 or Celeron chips was because it IS 64 bit, yet runs essentially all current 32 bit applications... this and the desire to see AMD achieve real parity or even some small dominance over Intel, to keep things affordable and progress from stalling, for reasons you all mentioned above concerning IBM and Intel.

[Losiack]

The new Romulan Advanced Logic Enhancer (or Romulan ALE) will send your motherboard spinning

SPQR Losiack
Correspondant for the Internal Romulan Information Service
The IRIS sees all