That, however, is where the similarities end. The Nocona chip is only
64bit on the outside, the internals are essentially built on a 32 bit
legacy system. The end result is that AMD is pure 64 bit and intel's
chip just won't keep up when full 64 bit code hits the market. The new
code will sing on AMD, but won't run a bit faster on intel's chip. Even
Intel has acknowledged their flaws. The current issue of infoworld
(http://www.infoworld.com) has the full story on it.
Matt Emmerton wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On Friday 06 August 2004 04:58, Brett Glass wrote:
http://eetimes.com/semi/news/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=26805631
Probably not. Intel isn't going to keep exactly the same architecture as
AMD
has now. They'll make a few minor ajustments to fine-tune their CPU.
According to the Intel people that I've talked to where I work (a big blue
company that isn't Dell), AMD64 and EM64T are the same on the opcode level.
Thus, code built for AMD64 will work unmodified on EM64T and vice versa.
(It would be silly for Intel to do otherwise, as they don't want to risk
losing any support from the community and market share that AMD has worked
hard to establish.)
While Intel (or AMD) may make changes to the underlying silicon to make
things better than their competitors (ie, larger caches, different pipeline
architecture, etc), they are committed to maintain compatibility between
AMD64 and EM64T.
--
Matt
_______________________________________________
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
_______________________________________________
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
