From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S261363AbUBYPgs (ORCPT ); Wed, 25 Feb 2004 10:36:48 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S261364AbUBYPgs (ORCPT ); Wed, 25 Feb 2004 10:36:48 -0500 Received: from prgy-npn1.prodigy.com ([207.115.54.37]:7297 "EHLO oddball.prodigy.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S261363AbUBYPgq (ORCPT ); Wed, 25 Feb 2004 10:36:46 -0500 Message-ID: <403CC225.60802@tmr.com> Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2004 10:41:25 -0500 From: Bill Davidsen User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.6b) Gecko/20031208 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Timothy Miller , Linux Kernel Mailing List Subject: Re: Intel vs AMD x86-64 References: <1sRYA-1uZ-23@gated-at.bofh.it> <1sSi2-1NC-5@gated-at.bofh.it> <1sT4l-2CW-17@gated-at.bofh.it> In-Reply-To: <1sT4l-2CW-17@gated-at.bofh.it> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Timothy Miller wrote: > I've been reading some people's comments relating to this, and it > reflects a glimmer of an idea that occurred to me initially. To begin > with, I completely agree that it was unethical for Intel to imply that > this was their innovation, giving no credit to AMD. It was wrong, and > they should be ashamed. Actually, it is unclear enough to me if the Intel chips will have any technical advantages that I have postponed buying the dual Opteron I was planning for 1Q04 until I read the Intel specs more carefully. These are the issues of interest: - hyperthreading will Intel offer it and will it be in some way better than the 10-30% gain I see from HT on a P4. - cost If Intel follows the previous price models for new chips they are not in any way going to be competitive on cost/performance. On the other hand they know that, they know they are playing catch-up in this market, and they might be aggressive for a change. - SSE3 what does it provide, is it in any way useful for anything I ever do, and will gcc or the free for personal use Intel C compiler support it? - availability will this be a product or just a product announcement? I can wait until 2Q04 if there's a reason to do so, after that I assume it's just FUD. - will it work or will it follow Itanium and take another generation before it runs faster than the hardware emulator? Speaking of which, I would like Intel to release the hardware emulator so I can do benchmarking now. Having HT in a single package has some advantages, but talk is cheap, and AMD is shipping. I personally hope it works really well and keeps prices down. -- bill on the road