If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Interesting read about upcoming K9 processors
http://www.digitimes.com/news/a20040726PR202.html
This interview with Tyan president Symon Chang provided the following quotes: "Around 2006, when the market moves to AMD's next generation of chips, you will be able to go over 8-way. What I mean is that with eight sockets, and dual cores, you then have sixteen processors, but with K9, you'll see it go over that. I think we'll see a significant increase in the amount of crossbar switches in the CPU. I'm not up on all the minute details, but you' ll be able to go over 60 processors without adding any external crossbar chips. We can do all that within the structure that is being currently created. The crossbar bar chip is the standard in the mainframe business whether it is for the Xeon, Opteron or other processors. There are a couple of versions of the crossbar chip today, but I don't think that anyone is currently using them for anything in the generic market; these solutions are really only for the mainframe market. Today's mainframe market with computers from IBM or Sparc will be using up to and over 128 processors, with chips such as IBM's 390 microprocessor. These machines are starting around US$1 million." That's right over 60 processors without any kind of a special chipset support!!! Also he had some opinions about Windows XP64: "Q: Do you think Microsoft's 64-bit OS will come out on time? Chang: I hope so. There are delays, but I believe it will. Interestingly enough, a couple of significant things have happened this year; for example, Intel's Xeon processor with 64-bit extensions is a reaction to the unexpected popularity of AMD's Opteron, which put Intel under pressure to provide a similar solution for the OEM market. If Intel had not reacted, it would have lost out. Their response was to come out with a 64-bit CPU that is not optimal, but at least they have it, and I would compare that with what Microsoft is doing now in the realm of the 64-bit operating system." Doesn't sound like Chang believes that Microsoft is trying all that hard to build a 64-bit OS. It's getting something out to show that it isn't behind the times. Yousuf Khan -- Humans: contact me at ykhan at rogers dot com Spambots: just reply to this email address ;-) |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
"Yousuf Khan" wrote in message
t.cable.rogers.com... "Q: Do you think Microsoft's 64-bit OS will come out on time? Are we still supposed to be excited about a 64-bit desktop OS from MS after all these years? I heard once it was going to be a slam dunk. Guess not... :-) Regards, Dean |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
On Mon, 26 Jul 2004 04:19:18 GMT, "Yousuf Khan" wrote:
http://www.digitimes.com/news/a20040726PR202.html This interview with Tyan president Symon Chang provided the following quotes: "Around 2006, when the market moves to AMD's next generation of chips, you will be able to go over 8-way. What I mean is that with eight sockets, and dual cores, you then have sixteen processors, but with K9, you'll see it go over that. I think we'll see a significant increase in the amount of crossbar switches in the CPU. I'm not up on all the minute details, but you' ll be able to go over 60 processors without adding any external crossbar chips. We can do all that within the structure that is being currently created. The crossbar bar chip is the standard in the mainframe business whether it is for the Xeon, Opteron or other processors. There are a couple of versions of the crossbar chip today, but I don't think that anyone is currently using them for anything in the generic market; these solutions are really only for the mainframe market. Today's mainframe market with computers from IBM or Sparc will be using up to and over 128 processors, with chips such as IBM's 390 microprocessor. These machines are starting around US$1 million." That's right over 60 processors without any kind of a special chipset support!!! Also he had some opinions about Windows XP64: "Q: Do you think Microsoft's 64-bit OS will come out on time? Chang: I hope so. There are delays, but I believe it will. Interestingly enough, a couple of significant things have happened this year; for example, Intel's Xeon processor with 64-bit extensions is a reaction to the unexpected popularity of AMD's Opteron, which put Intel under pressure to provide a similar solution for the OEM market. If Intel had not reacted, it would have lost out. Their response was to come out with a 64-bit CPU that is not optimal, but at least they have it, and I would compare that with what Microsoft is doing now in the realm of the 64-bit operating system." Hmmm, "not optimal"?? How much can we read into that on top of the deafening EM64T silence on WWW? As for "unexpected popularity of AMD's Opteron"... must be a riddle... too difficult for me.:-) Doesn't sound like Chang believes that Microsoft is trying all that hard to build a 64-bit OS. It's getting something out to show that it isn't behind the times. .... or that we'll get it when Intel is good and ready for us to have it.:-( Rgds, George Macdonald "Just because they're paranoid doesn't mean you're not psychotic" - Who, me?? |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Yousuf Khan wrote: Doesn't sound like Chang believes that Microsoft is trying all that hard to build a 64-bit OS. It's getting something out to show that it isn't behind the times. Going to 64 bits will be trivial compared to going to 64 way for Microsoft. Joe Seigh |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
George Macdonald wrote:
On Mon, 26 Jul 2004 04:19:18 GMT, "Yousuf Khan" wrote: [SNIP] Doesn't sound like Chang believes that Microsoft is trying all that hard to build a 64-bit OS. It's getting something out to show that it isn't behind the times. ... or that we'll get it when Intel is good and ready for us to have it.:-( That just means MS loses market & mindshare to other more capable operating systems. It also weakens their "Enterprise Class" claims. 64bit Windows has very few production machine hours compared to Linux (for example). 64 bit Windows is hardly what I would call "Enterprise Ready", but there are plenty of alternatives that are. Cheers, Rupert |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
In comp.arch Joe Seigh wrote:
Yousuf Khan wrote: Doesn't sound like Chang believes that Microsoft is trying all that hard to build a 64-bit OS. It's getting something out to show that it isn't behind the times. Going to 64 bits will be trivial compared to going to 64 way for Microsoft. Joe Seigh why do you say that? Maybe there will be particular issues for applications to make use of all those CPUs but I don't see why it would be such a big deal for the OS kernel scheduler. IMHO, 64-bits is much harder considering the Win32 API. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
In article , Pleasant Thrip writes: | | why do you say that? Maybe there will be particular issues for | applications to make use of all those CPUs but I don't see why it would | be such a big deal for the OS kernel scheduler. Hmm. Do you manage any large CPU-count SMP systems? | IMHO, 64-bits is much harder considering the Win32 API. No, Joe Seigh is right. Regards, Nick Maclaren. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Pleasant Thrip wrote: In comp.arch Joe Seigh wrote: Yousuf Khan wrote: Doesn't sound like Chang believes that Microsoft is trying all that hard to build a 64-bit OS. It's getting something out to show that it isn't behind the times. Going to 64 bits will be trivial compared to going to 64 way for Microsoft. Joe Seigh why do you say that? Maybe there will be particular issues for applications to make use of all those CPUs but I don't see why it would be such a big deal for the OS kernel scheduler. IMHO, 64-bits is much harder considering the Win32 API. Scalability primarily judging from the experience of the other OS vendors. Joe Seigh |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
As always, AMD is good and Intel is bad. Same old spiel. YAWN!
"Yousuf Khan" wrote in message t.cable.rogers.com... http://www.digitimes.com/news/a20040726PR202.html This interview with Tyan president Symon Chang provided the following quotes: "Around 2006, when the market moves to AMD's next generation of chips, you will be able to go over 8-way. What I mean is that with eight sockets, and dual cores, you then have sixteen processors, but with K9, you'll see it go over that. I think we'll see a significant increase in the amount of crossbar switches in the CPU. I'm not up on all the minute details, but you' ll be able to go over 60 processors without adding any external crossbar chips. We can do all that within the structure that is being currently created. The crossbar bar chip is the standard in the mainframe business whether it is for the Xeon, Opteron or other processors. There are a couple of versions of the crossbar chip today, but I don't think that anyone is currently using them for anything in the generic market; these solutions are really only for the mainframe market. Today's mainframe market with computers from IBM or Sparc will be using up to and over 128 processors, with chips such as IBM's 390 microprocessor. These machines are starting around US$1 million." That's right over 60 processors without any kind of a special chipset support!!! Also he had some opinions about Windows XP64: "Q: Do you think Microsoft's 64-bit OS will come out on time? Chang: I hope so. There are delays, but I believe it will. Interestingly enough, a couple of significant things have happened this year; for example, Intel's Xeon processor with 64-bit extensions is a reaction to the unexpected popularity of AMD's Opteron, which put Intel under pressure to provide a similar solution for the OEM market. If Intel had not reacted, it would have lost out. Their response was to come out with a 64-bit CPU that is not optimal, but at least they have it, and I would compare that with what Microsoft is doing now in the realm of the 64-bit operating system." Doesn't sound like Chang believes that Microsoft is trying all that hard to build a 64-bit OS. It's getting something out to show that it isn't behind the times. Yousuf Khan -- Humans: contact me at ykhan at rogers dot com Spambots: just reply to this email address ;-) |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Rupert Pigott wrote:
That just means MS loses market & mindshare to other more capable operating systems. It also weakens their "Enterprise Class" claims. 64bit Windows has very few production machine hours compared to Linux (for example). 64 bit Windows is hardly what I would call "Enterprise Ready", but there are plenty of alternatives that are. Microsoft should have just released Windows 64, despite not having enough optimized drivers for it. There's nothing like a shipping product to drive driver development. Yousuf Khan |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Harddisks: Seek, Read, Write, Read, Write, Slow ? | Marc de Vries | General | 7 | July 26th 04 02:57 AM |
AMD Processors - HELP! | Sseaott | Overclocking AMD Processors | 1 | June 15th 04 09:13 AM |
AMD Processors - HELP! | Sseaott | AMD x86-64 Processors | 0 | June 15th 04 03:33 AM |
Please Read...A Must Read | Trini4life2k2 | General | 1 | March 8th 04 12:30 AM |
Seagate SATA 120GB raw read errors | Kierkecaat | General | 0 | December 16th 03 02:52 PM |