What's all this poppy-cock about the 64 bit processor?

[FatTony]

Ok, my friend (who "knows everything") told me that the new itaya (or something like that) is out, and that it's the new 64 bit processor. Now, i don't even know what the difference the bit's make, but i just wanted to know if this is a true statement.

Also, WindowsXP when, how, why, and what?
I heard (same friend) that winXP is based on the 64 bit cpu, now, if this is true, does that mean i can't use it with my duron, or would i want to anyways? One last question, now i was under the impression that win me took out dos, but someone else told me that isn't true but xp is gonna do that, please set all these confusing rumors straight (if you can) Thankyou.

[NDC]

I think what you're friend is referring to is the "Intel Itanium"...

Think of the bits this way... Most processors that we use at home are 32bit processors, such as Intel P3, Celeron, T-Bird, etc... And they process data in 32bit chunks Vs. 64bit chunks. G4's uses a software based engine called "Velocity Engine" that allows data to be processed in 128bit chunks. But of course, the software must be coded to take advantage of the "Velocity Engine" that the Motorola processors utilize, the way Intel processors utilize SSE technology.


As for backwards compatibility with Windows XP with 32bit processors, it is supported.

[Wilan Wong]

As NDC said, Windows XP is compatible with current 32-bit processors and Intel Itanium processors, however, I have read that the Itanium is quite slow when doing 32-bit instructions, since it has to "emulate" it, which will cause current applications to run a lot slower than it could... well, this is what I heard/read, also AMD is going to release a 64-bit processor that is going against the Itanium, which is the Clawhammer, and the server version SledgeHammer.. the AMD chips don't need to emulate 32-bit instructions and instead can run it at "full speed".

[RobRich]

http://www.sysopt.com/articles/k8/index.html

http://www.sysopt.com/articles/usparc-3/index.html

http://www.sysopt.com/articles/64bit/

Catch ya' later,
Robert Richmond

[Dputiger]

Here's the deal:

IA-64: This is Intel's newest 64-bit standard, supported by the Itanium and the upcoming McKinley. Very little performance data is available as of right now, but anecdotal evidence suggests the chips FPU performance in 64-bit is quite good.

A 64-bit version of Windows XP WILL support this processor--however--the vast majority of WindowsXP users will be using the standard 32-bit version that will be released first.

The Itanium DOES have major performance issues in 32-bit. The last reliable benchmark figures for the Itanium 800 Mhz part had it performing at roughly the level of a 486 DX100 in 32-bit code.

x86-64: This is AMD's answer to IA-64. These processors are known collectively as 'Hammer' and will be available in a server version 'Sledgehammer' and a workstation/desktop version 'Clawhammer.'

x86-64 architecture is an implementation of 64-bit architecture on the x86 architecture. The advantage of this is, of course, 32-bit performance will be unaffected--the Hammer chips will run 32-bit code and 64-bit code equally fast.

Ironically, this is exactly what Intel did with the 386 processor. Rather than designing a new architecture from scratch, Intel added 32-bit support to the existing x86 architecture.

Pro's and cons of each:

IA 64:

Good 64-bit performance
New (and needed) CPU architecture

Horrible 32-bit performance
Extremely expensive (and proprietary)

x86-64:

Full compatibility with existing software
High speed
Easier to design/implement

Based on old architecture
Still unknown performance levels.