Author: Eugene Nalimov
Date: 09:18:40 07/01/03
Go up one level in this thread
On July 01, 2003 at 11:59:52, Robert Hyatt wrote: >On June 30, 2003 at 21:08:49, Tom Kerrigan wrote: > >>>On June 29, 2003 at 23:50:11, Robert Hyatt wrote: >>> >>>>On June 29, 2003 at 06:35:02, Tony Werten wrote: >>>> >>>>>On June 28, 2003 at 14:23:50, Robert Hyatt wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>On June 28, 2003 at 12:12:15, Jay Urbanski wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>>On June 28, 2003 at 10:33:45, Robert Hyatt wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>Those are not true 64 bit processors. Supposedly 32 bit stuff runs just >>>>>>>>fine on them, but they have 64 bit extensions. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>How is Opteron not a true 64-bit processor? >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>Because it executes 32 bit instructions _also_. >> >>If this is your criteria, that means no UltraSparc, > >There we agree. Most of Solaris is _still_ 32 bit code. > >> PA-RISC, MIPS, or POWER >>processors are "true" 64 bit processors because they're all fully backwards >>compatible with their older 32 bit instruction sets, exactly like the Opteron. > >I didn't say they were not "full 64 bit processors". I said they were "less >than optimal". > >There is a difference. > >> >>Hmm, that's news to Sun, HP, SGI, and IBM. >> >>Actually, IA64 chips also run 32 bit "stuff" "just fine" (albeit slowly). So >>Itanium is not truly 64 bit either. > >What do they run from the X86 world? Zilch. Not talking about software >emulation here, but real hardware. The alpha can run vax code, but _not_ >in hardware. Itanium can run user-level 32-bit code in hardware -- assuming that 64-bit OS has support for that mode. But here I agree with Tom: both Itanium and AMD64 are real 64-bit CPUs. They also can run 32- and 16-bit x86 code, and AMD64 even has full 32- and 16-bit OS support, i.e. it can boot 16- or 32-bit OS. Thanks, Eugene >> >>-Tom
This page took 0.01 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.