Sun: 'Microprocessors are dead'

TalkBack 16 of 17:

Next »

« Previous

• Thread View
• Flat View

AMD vs. Intel

Actually, the EPIC idea is more close to the "hair-brain" designs than other things Intel has done. EPIC requires very "smart" compilers to take advantage of it. EPIC can be leveraged by a small class of applications.

AMD has a better micro-processor design because they can support more smoothly 32 and 64 bit applications. Binary compatilbility (ABI) to lower bitness is what is pluguing Intel. All Unix vendors I know of, never caused anything but minor nuances to 32-bit apps when executing on a 64-bit platform (OS and h/w). Recompilation of all 32-bit s/w base will be needed to take advantage of IA64 features. Let alone the fact that apps would have to be corrected/modified ro remove assumptions on the item size models (ILP32 to LP64). x86 code is notoriously tied up to the vagaries of the underlying memory and data models of Intel. Everybody knows what a royal pain is programming in these contorted models.

Intel realized that 64-bit is the future (ofcourse) and started its IA64. However, its Itanium have been marred by perfornmance problems. It wasn't until recently that Itanium 2 showed some promise.

Why do you think they kept providing faster and faster (in the Hz sense) 32 bit processors? Luckluster performance of their 64 bit solutions and incompatibility with 32-bit binaries.

It is not that people do not want the greatest, but it will take them to REINVENT the WHEEL on their s/w base.

Similar (d)evolutionary history took place with MS. They just started by pushing shoddy, cruedly designed/though out code for their apps and their "OS". When the time came to face up to their task to provide a TRUELY professional and robust OS and app. base, they realized that they would have to reinvent the wheel. Look how hard it is for them to fix all the innumerable bugs and security vulnerabilities.

The bottom line is that there should be a compormise between time to marked and QUALITY. Intel and MS took inirially the low road to satisfy time to market targets.

Now, they both suffer from their designs that are impossible to EVOLVE smoothly, but they have to be pretty much discarded and re-done frm scratch.

In the meantime it seems that AMD took a more moderate approach and placed more emphasis on the desing/evolutionary path aspect of it.

Everyone knows that time invested in design leads to large savings in time wasted in redressing /rebuilding,

It is maybe a human feature that when you are under intense pressure by more powerful entities you either do your best or die out. It is also a human feature that powerful entities which remain unchallenged and start abusing excessively their privilleges plant the seeds of their own destruction.

Posted by: michael-t   Posted on: 10/16/03 You are currently: a Guest | Members login | Terms of Use

Alert moderator to an offensive message

Subscribe to this discussion via Email or RSS

SponsoredWhite Papers, Webcasts, and Downloads

• Busting the myths about QuickBooks Enterprise Solutions and IBM Smart Business IBM So you already know there aren't actually any alligators in the New York ... Download Now
• Virtualization: Architectural Considerations And Other Evaluation Criteria VMware Of the many approaches to x86 systems virtualization available in the ... Download Now
• Five Steps to Determine When to Virtualize YourServers VMware Server virtualization isn't just for big companies. Entry-level ... Download Now