AMD64 vs EM64T

Discussion in 'Windows 64bit' started by =?Utf-8?B?Tmljaw==?=, Sep 8, 2005.

  1. Some collueages of mine were discussing what it "is" to be a "64 bit
    processor."

    AMD64 contains 64 bit registers and 32 bit registers and other nice internal
    registers.
    The P4 w/ EM64T contains a dual core processor, but both cores are "32 bit
    processors" with software that allows them to emulate a "64 bit processor"

    The question is: are the only *true* 64 bit processors available now (Summer
    '05) the ones released by AMD?

    Thanks,
    -Nick
     
    =?Utf-8?B?Tmljaw==?=, Sep 8, 2005
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Actually, both processors are x86 based with x64 extensions added to them so
    they can process large chunks of memory and data, thats why they are
    actually known as x86-x64 processors.
    http://www.open-mag.com/features/Vol_117/EM64T/EM64T.htm
    --
    Andre
    Extended64 | http://www.extended64.com
    Blog | http://www.extended64.com/blogs/andre
    http://spaces.msn.com/members/adacosta
    FAQ for MS AntiSpy http://www.geocities.com/marfer_mvp/FAQ_MSantispy.htm

    "Nick" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > Some collueages of mine were discussing what it "is" to be a "64 bit
    > processor."
    >
    > AMD64 contains 64 bit registers and 32 bit registers and other nice
    > internal
    > registers.
    > The P4 w/ EM64T contains a dual core processor, but both cores are "32 bit
    > processors" with software that allows them to emulate a "64 bit processor"
    >
    > The question is: are the only *true* 64 bit processors available now
    > (Summer
    > '05) the ones released by AMD?
    >
    > Thanks,
    > -Nick
     
    Andre Da Costa [Extended64], Sep 8, 2005
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. =?Utf-8?B?Tmljaw==?=

    Torrey Lauer Guest

    Am I mistaken? I thought that Intel had a single core P4 w/ EM64T and a
    dual core? I also know that AMD has a dual core 64 bit processor as well.
    Is it just on the Opterons or does the Athlon 64's have a dual core? I know
    that AMD has the X2, but can't remember if it's 64 bit or 32 bit.

    Regardless, I'm going with Opterons for all our computers in our office and
    for my personal PCs. There is a definate difference in speed between 32 bit
    and 64 bit. Most consumers probably wouldn't notice a few seconds
    difference, but time is money for me in business.

    --
    Torrey Lauer
    Modern Travel Services
    moderntravel DOT net

    Rainbow Sky Travel
    rainbow sky travel DOT net
    "Nick" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > Some collueages of mine were discussing what it "is" to be a "64 bit
    > processor."
    >
    > AMD64 contains 64 bit registers and 32 bit registers and other nice
    > internal
    > registers.
    > The P4 w/ EM64T contains a dual core processor, but both cores are "32 bit
    > processors" with software that allows them to emulate a "64 bit processor"
    >
    > The question is: are the only *true* 64 bit processors available now
    > (Summer
    > '05) the ones released by AMD?
    >
    > Thanks,
    > -Nick
     
    Torrey Lauer, Sep 8, 2005
    #3
  4. I know that there is a single Core P4 EM64T, Intel did that to make pricing
    attractive.
    --
    Andre
    Extended64 | http://www.extended64.com
    Blog | http://www.extended64.com/blogs/andre
    http://spaces.msn.com/members/adacosta
    FAQ for MS AntiSpy http://www.geocities.com/marfer_mvp/FAQ_MSantispy.htm

    "Torrey Lauer" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > Am I mistaken? I thought that Intel had a single core P4 w/ EM64T and a
    > dual core? I also know that AMD has a dual core 64 bit processor as well.
    > Is it just on the Opterons or does the Athlon 64's have a dual core? I
    > know that AMD has the X2, but can't remember if it's 64 bit or 32 bit.
    >
    > Regardless, I'm going with Opterons for all our computers in our office
    > and for my personal PCs. There is a definate difference in speed between
    > 32 bit and 64 bit. Most consumers probably wouldn't notice a few seconds
    > difference, but time is money for me in business.
    >
    > --
    > Torrey Lauer
    > Modern Travel Services
    > moderntravel DOT net
    >
    > Rainbow Sky Travel
    > rainbow sky travel DOT net
    > "Nick" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    >> Some collueages of mine were discussing what it "is" to be a "64 bit
    >> processor."
    >>
    >> AMD64 contains 64 bit registers and 32 bit registers and other nice
    >> internal
    >> registers.
    >> The P4 w/ EM64T contains a dual core processor, but both cores are "32
    >> bit
    >> processors" with software that allows them to emulate a "64 bit
    >> processor"
    >>
    >> The question is: are the only *true* 64 bit processors available now
    >> (Summer
    >> '05) the ones released by AMD?
    >>
    >> Thanks,
    >> -Nick

    >
    >
     
    Andre Da Costa [Extended64], Sep 8, 2005
    #4
  5. The AMD Athlon 64 X2 is a dual core 64-bit processor.
    http://www.amd.com/us-en/Processors/ProductInformation/0,,30_118_9484,00.html

    Intel followed some time later by introducing the Pentium Extreme Edition,
    which is a dual core model, though I haven't found the definitive answer on
    whether they are dual x32's or x64's.
    http://www.intel.com/products/processor/pentiumXE/index.htm

    "Torrey Lauer" wrote:

    > Am I mistaken? I thought that Intel had a single core P4 w/ EM64T and a
    > dual core? I also know that AMD has a dual core 64 bit processor as well.
    > Is it just on the Opterons or does the Athlon 64's have a dual core? I know
    > that AMD has the X2, but can't remember if it's 64 bit or 32 bit.
    >
    > Regardless, I'm going with Opterons for all our computers in our office and
    > for my personal PCs. There is a definate difference in speed between 32 bit
    > and 64 bit. Most consumers probably wouldn't notice a few seconds
    > difference, but time is money for me in business.
    >
    > --
    > Torrey Lauer
    > Modern Travel Services
    > moderntravel DOT net
    >
    > Rainbow Sky Travel
    > rainbow sky travel DOT net
    > "Nick" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    > > Some collueages of mine were discussing what it "is" to be a "64 bit
    > > processor."
    > >
    > > AMD64 contains 64 bit registers and 32 bit registers and other nice
    > > internal
    > > registers.
    > > The P4 w/ EM64T contains a dual core processor, but both cores are "32 bit
    > > processors" with software that allows them to emulate a "64 bit processor"
    > >
    > > The question is: are the only *true* 64 bit processors available now
    > > (Summer
    > > '05) the ones released by AMD?
    > >
    > > Thanks,
    > > -Nick

    >
    >
    >
     
    =?Utf-8?B?Si5HcmlmZmlz?=, Sep 8, 2005
    #5
  6. =?Utf-8?B?Tmljaw==?=

    NoNoBadDog! Guest

    The "dual-core" Intel's are merely two single cores glued together. They
    have no crossbar and cannot see or communicate with each other directly. In
    order for the two cores to see and talk to each other, the must do so
    through the Northbridge chipset. Obviously this presents major problems
    related to performance. Intel has admitted it rushed its dual cores to
    market for the sole purpose of beating AMD to the street with a "dual-core".

    Intel EM64T chips are P4 chips with the x-86 instruction set encoded, but
    all of the bottlenecks of the P4 architecture still exist.

    AMD Athlon64 and Turion64 chips were completely redesigned, and have many
    advantages of EM64T. AMD has Direct Connect Architecture and the
    Hypertransport bus...Intel has nothing comparable on their EM64T chips. The
    L1 (data) and L2 caches in and AMD are exclusive, while in Intel they are
    Inclusive. I could go on, but you get the picture...Intel continues to
    build it's processors around the antiquated P4 architecture, and until it
    changes this, it will continue to be left in the dust.

    To put it simply...when it comes to 64 bit processors and dual-core
    processors, AMD simply kicks Intel's butt.

    Intel used to be an innovative company. Wonder what happened?




    "J.Griffis" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > The AMD Athlon 64 X2 is a dual core 64-bit processor.
    > http://www.amd.com/us-en/Processors/ProductInformation/0,,30_118_9484,00.html
    >
    > Intel followed some time later by introducing the Pentium Extreme Edition,
    > which is a dual core model, though I haven't found the definitive answer
    > on
    > whether they are dual x32's or x64's.
    > http://www.intel.com/products/processor/pentiumXE/index.htm
    >
    > "Torrey Lauer" wrote:
    >
    >> Am I mistaken? I thought that Intel had a single core P4 w/ EM64T and a
    >> dual core? I also know that AMD has a dual core 64 bit processor as
    >> well.
    >> Is it just on the Opterons or does the Athlon 64's have a dual core? I
    >> know
    >> that AMD has the X2, but can't remember if it's 64 bit or 32 bit.
    >>
    >> Regardless, I'm going with Opterons for all our computers in our office
    >> and
    >> for my personal PCs. There is a definate difference in speed between 32
    >> bit
    >> and 64 bit. Most consumers probably wouldn't notice a few seconds
    >> difference, but time is money for me in business.
    >>
    >> --
    >> Torrey Lauer
    >> Modern Travel Services
    >> moderntravel DOT net
    >>
    >> Rainbow Sky Travel
    >> rainbow sky travel DOT net
    >> "Nick" <> wrote in message
    >> news:...
    >> > Some collueages of mine were discussing what it "is" to be a "64 bit
    >> > processor."
    >> >
    >> > AMD64 contains 64 bit registers and 32 bit registers and other nice
    >> > internal
    >> > registers.
    >> > The P4 w/ EM64T contains a dual core processor, but both cores are "32
    >> > bit
    >> > processors" with software that allows them to emulate a "64 bit
    >> > processor"
    >> >
    >> > The question is: are the only *true* 64 bit processors available now
    >> > (Summer
    >> > '05) the ones released by AMD?
    >> >
    >> > Thanks,
    >> > -Nick

    >>
    >>
    >>
     
    NoNoBadDog!, Sep 8, 2005
    #6
  7. Nice info NoNoBadDog... I tried to look up similar information. AMD seems
    good about presenting the insides of its 64 line processors but Intel tries
    to hide everything... Do you have a URL to the "technical" information of any
    of the Intel processors that have EM64T?

    And thanks to all who replied. Seems my favorite (AMD) wins today's race. :)

    -Nick

    "NoNoBadDog!" wrote:

    > The "dual-core" Intel's are merely two single cores glued together. They
    > have no crossbar and cannot see or communicate with each other directly. In
    > order for the two cores to see and talk to each other, the must do so
    > through the Northbridge chipset. Obviously this presents major problems
    > related to performance. Intel has admitted it rushed its dual cores to
    > market for the sole purpose of beating AMD to the street with a "dual-core".
    >
    > Intel EM64T chips are P4 chips with the x-86 instruction set encoded, but
    > all of the bottlenecks of the P4 architecture still exist.
    >
    > AMD Athlon64 and Turion64 chips were completely redesigned, and have many
    > advantages of EM64T. AMD has Direct Connect Architecture and the
    > Hypertransport bus...Intel has nothing comparable on their EM64T chips. The
    > L1 (data) and L2 caches in and AMD are exclusive, while in Intel they are
    > Inclusive. I could go on, but you get the picture...Intel continues to
    > build it's processors around the antiquated P4 architecture, and until it
    > changes this, it will continue to be left in the dust.
    >
    > To put it simply...when it comes to 64 bit processors and dual-core
    > processors, AMD simply kicks Intel's butt.
    >
    > Intel used to be an innovative company. Wonder what happened?
    >
    >
    >
    >
    > "J.Griffis" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    > > The AMD Athlon 64 X2 is a dual core 64-bit processor.
    > > http://www.amd.com/us-en/Processors/ProductInformation/0,,30_118_9484,00.html
    > >
    > > Intel followed some time later by introducing the Pentium Extreme Edition,
    > > which is a dual core model, though I haven't found the definitive answer
    > > on
    > > whether they are dual x32's or x64's.
    > > http://www.intel.com/products/processor/pentiumXE/index.htm
    > >
    > > "Torrey Lauer" wrote:
    > >
    > >> Am I mistaken? I thought that Intel had a single core P4 w/ EM64T and a
    > >> dual core? I also know that AMD has a dual core 64 bit processor as
    > >> well.
    > >> Is it just on the Opterons or does the Athlon 64's have a dual core? I
    > >> know
    > >> that AMD has the X2, but can't remember if it's 64 bit or 32 bit.
    > >>
    > >> Regardless, I'm going with Opterons for all our computers in our office
    > >> and
    > >> for my personal PCs. There is a definate difference in speed between 32
    > >> bit
    > >> and 64 bit. Most consumers probably wouldn't notice a few seconds
    > >> difference, but time is money for me in business.
    > >>
    > >> --
    > >> Torrey Lauer
    > >> Modern Travel Services
    > >> moderntravel DOT net
    > >>
    > >> Rainbow Sky Travel
    > >> rainbow sky travel DOT net
    > >> "Nick" <> wrote in message
    > >> news:...
    > >> > Some collueages of mine were discussing what it "is" to be a "64 bit
    > >> > processor."
    > >> >
    > >> > AMD64 contains 64 bit registers and 32 bit registers and other nice
    > >> > internal
    > >> > registers.
    > >> > The P4 w/ EM64T contains a dual core processor, but both cores are "32
    > >> > bit
    > >> > processors" with software that allows them to emulate a "64 bit
    > >> > processor"
    > >> >
    > >> > The question is: are the only *true* 64 bit processors available now
    > >> > (Summer
    > >> > '05) the ones released by AMD?
    > >> >
    > >> > Thanks,
    > >> > -Nick
    > >>
    > >>
    > >>

    >
    >
    >
     
    =?Utf-8?B?Tmljaw==?=, Sep 8, 2005
    #7
  8. =?Utf-8?B?Tmljaw==?=

    roman modic Guest

    roman modic, Sep 9, 2005
    #8
  9. =?Utf-8?B?Tmljaw==?=

    NoNoBadDog! Guest

    "roman modic" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > Hello.
    >
    >>
    >> Intel used to be an innovative company. Wonder what happened?
    >>

    >
    > Intel Conroe (new x86 processor micro-architecture next year):
    > http://star-techcentral.com/tech/story.asp?file=/2005/9/6/itfeature/11940744&sec=itfeature
    > http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/cpu/display/20050408140302.html
    > http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2492&p=2
    >
    > Best regards, Roman
    >
    >

    Nothing really *new* or innovative here. Still built on a P4 core. Still
    tied to a useless Northbridge chipset. At least they had the common sense
    to drop Hyperthreading from the first models.

    Once Intel figures out that they cannot base their next generation chips on
    the P4 architecture, they may once a gain rise to the top.

    They need to realize that they have to do away with the bottlenecks that
    they are perpetuating. Their motto is "Slower is Better". They are having
    to reduce the core voltage and frequency of their chips as a matter of heat
    management. They need to swallow their pride and adopt the Hypertransport
    Bus and Direct Connect Architecture.

    There is not a single thing on their recently announce CPU roadmap that is
    different than anything they have been doing for the last year (excluding
    moving to 65nm and eliminating the nearly useless hyperthreading).

    It is sad to watch a might warrior stumble on the battlefield. Maybe
    someday Intel will re-awaken. Until then, the smart money in on AMD.

    Bobby
     
    NoNoBadDog!, Sep 9, 2005
    #9
  10. =?Utf-8?B?Tmljaw==?=

    Mercury Guest

    > It is sad to watch a might warrior stumble on the battlefield. Maybe
    > someday Intel will re-awaken. Until then, the smart money in on AMD.
    >
    > Bobby
    >
    >


    Agree. There is a lot of speculation, wishful thinking, announcements, and
    road maps. none of these mean anything based on recent history unless Intel
    delivers products. The maze of new product codes from Intel is astonishing
    yet empty and reminds me of the phenomenon of 'Thrashing'.

    For the industry, it really would be exciting if some of the speculated
    products came to fruition - it will sooner or later, but for around 4 years
    now Intel has done little innovation - AMD OTOH has broken the GHz war, won
    the CPU thermal runaway battle, and delivered working Dual Core systems.

    Frankly, I don't think dual core will be a screaming success in the Home
    (volume) market - the developers and the tools do not exist to bring dual
    core benefits to the masses. So, there is this figment of a solution to more
    grunt needs, which still requires a real solution. Come on Intel (and
    AMD).....
     
    Mercury, Sep 10, 2005
    #10
  11. =?Utf-8?B?Tmljaw==?=

    James N. Guest

    IMO, the average computer users should only care about 2 things:

    - How fast is a particular processor performs in 32-bit or 64-bit between
    Intel and AMD and how much power that it used. The internal architecture is
    at most meaningless to the average users. ask yourself this, do you care if
    your car engine has 16 valves or 24 valves or twin cam or aluminum head,
    etc.; or do you care its MPG and how fast it can accelerate?

    These mindless arguments of whether the CPU is 32bit or 64bit processor do
    not mean much.




    "J.Griffis" wrote:

    > The AMD Athlon 64 X2 is a dual core 64-bit processor.
    > http://www.amd.com/us-en/Processors/ProductInformation/0,,30_118_9484,00.html
    >
    > Intel followed some time later by introducing the Pentium Extreme Edition,
    > which is a dual core model, though I haven't found the definitive answer on
    > whether they are dual x32's or x64's.
    > http://www.intel.com/products/processor/pentiumXE/index.htm
    >
    > "Torrey Lauer" wrote:
    >
    > > Am I mistaken? I thought that Intel had a single core P4 w/ EM64T and a
    > > dual core? I also know that AMD has a dual core 64 bit processor as well.
    > > Is it just on the Opterons or does the Athlon 64's have a dual core? I know
    > > that AMD has the X2, but can't remember if it's 64 bit or 32 bit.
    > >
    > > Regardless, I'm going with Opterons for all our computers in our office and
    > > for my personal PCs. There is a definate difference in speed between 32 bit
    > > and 64 bit. Most consumers probably wouldn't notice a few seconds
    > > difference, but time is money for me in business.
    > >
    > > --
    > > Torrey Lauer
    > > Modern Travel Services
    > > moderntravel DOT net
    > >
    > > Rainbow Sky Travel
    > > rainbow sky travel DOT net
    > > "Nick" <> wrote in message
    > > news:...
    > > > Some collueages of mine were discussing what it "is" to be a "64 bit
    > > > processor."
    > > >
    > > > AMD64 contains 64 bit registers and 32 bit registers and other nice
    > > > internal
    > > > registers.
    > > > The P4 w/ EM64T contains a dual core processor, but both cores are "32 bit
    > > > processors" with software that allows them to emulate a "64 bit processor"
    > > >
    > > > The question is: are the only *true* 64 bit processors available now
    > > > (Summer
    > > > '05) the ones released by AMD?
    > > >
    > > > Thanks,
    > > > -Nick

    > >
    > >
    > >
     
    James N., Feb 9, 2009
    #11
  12. I care. But, I am also a car enthusiast and all those specs
    are very important to me when I'm buying a car. I love the
    smell of burning tires and exhaust fumes! I also love the
    sound of the engine as I'm changing gears going around
    curves and up & down hills. And I perform the vast majority
    of the maintenance on my car.

    Of course I never said I was 'average' either.


    James N. wrote:
    > IMO, the average computer users should only care about 2 things:
    >
    > - How fast is a particular processor performs in 32-bit or 64-bit between
    > Intel and AMD and how much power that it used. The internal architecture is
    > at most meaningless to the average users. ask yourself this, do you care if
    > your car engine has 16 valves or 24 valves or twin cam or aluminum head,
    > etc.; or do you care its MPG and how fast it can accelerate?
    >
    > These mindless arguments of whether the CPU is 32bit or 64bit processor do
    > not mean much.
    >
    >
    >
    >
    > "J.Griffis" wrote:
    >
    >> The AMD Athlon 64 X2 is a dual core 64-bit processor.
    >> http://www.amd.com/us-en/Processors/ProductInformation/0,,30_118_9484,00.html
    >>
    >> Intel followed some time later by introducing the Pentium Extreme Edition,
    >> which is a dual core model, though I haven't found the definitive answer on
    >> whether they are dual x32's or x64's.
    >> http://www.intel.com/products/processor/pentiumXE/index.htm
    >>
    >> "Torrey Lauer" wrote:
    >>
    >>> Am I mistaken? I thought that Intel had a single core P4 w/ EM64T and a
    >>> dual core? I also know that AMD has a dual core 64 bit processor as well.
    >>> Is it just on the Opterons or does the Athlon 64's have a dual core? I know
    >>> that AMD has the X2, but can't remember if it's 64 bit or 32 bit.
    >>>
    >>> Regardless, I'm going with Opterons for all our computers in our office and
    >>> for my personal PCs. There is a definate difference in speed between 32 bit
    >>> and 64 bit. Most consumers probably wouldn't notice a few seconds
    >>> difference, but time is money for me in business.
    >>>
    >>> --
    >>> Torrey Lauer
    >>> Modern Travel Services
    >>> moderntravel DOT net
    >>>
    >>> Rainbow Sky Travel
    >>> rainbow sky travel DOT net
    >>> "Nick" <> wrote in message
    >>> news:...
    >>>> Some collueages of mine were discussing what it "is" to be a "64 bit
    >>>> processor."
    >>>>
    >>>> AMD64 contains 64 bit registers and 32 bit registers and other nice
    >>>> internal
    >>>> registers.
    >>>> The P4 w/ EM64T contains a dual core processor, but both cores are "32 bit
    >>>> processors" with software that allows them to emulate a "64 bit processor"
    >>>>
    >>>> The question is: are the only *true* 64 bit processors available now
    >>>> (Summer
    >>>> '05) the ones released by AMD?
    >>>>
    >>>> Thanks,
    >>>> -Nick
    >>>
    >>>
     
    Bobby Johnson, Feb 10, 2009
    #12
  13. And we all agreed years ago on this newsgroup that we would NOT get into
    wars on which CPU was better. There's no gain there.

    --
    Charlie.
    http://msmvps.com/blogs/xperts64
    http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/profile/charlie.russel

    "Bobby Johnson" <> wrote in message
    news:%...
    >I care. But, I am also a car enthusiast and all those specs are very
    >important to me when I'm buying a car. I love the smell of burning tires
    >and exhaust fumes! I also love the sound of the engine as I'm changing
    >gears going around curves and up & down hills. And I perform the vast
    >majority of the maintenance on my car.
    >
    > Of course I never said I was 'average' either.
    >
    >
    > James N. wrote:
    >> IMO, the average computer users should only care about 2 things:
    >>
    >> - How fast is a particular processor performs in 32-bit or 64-bit
    >> between Intel and AMD and how much power that it used. The internal
    >> architecture is at most meaningless to the average users. ask yourself
    >> this, do you care if your car engine has 16 valves or 24 valves or twin
    >> cam or aluminum head, etc.; or do you care its MPG and how fast it can
    >> accelerate? These mindless arguments of whether the CPU is 32bit or
    >> 64bit processor do not mean much. "J.Griffis" wrote:
    >>
    >>> The AMD Athlon 64 X2 is a dual core 64-bit processor.
    >>> http://www.amd.com/us-en/Processors/ProductInformation/0,,30_118_9484,00.html
    >>>
    >>> Intel followed some time later by introducing the Pentium Extreme
    >>> Edition, which is a dual core model, though I haven't found the
    >>> definitive answer on whether they are dual x32's or x64's.
    >>> http://www.intel.com/products/processor/pentiumXE/index.htm
    >>>
    >>> "Torrey Lauer" wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> Am I mistaken? I thought that Intel had a single core P4 w/ EM64T and
    >>>> a dual core? I also know that AMD has a dual core 64 bit processor as
    >>>> well. Is it just on the Opterons or does the Athlon 64's have a dual
    >>>> core? I know that AMD has the X2, but can't remember if it's 64 bit or
    >>>> 32 bit.
    >>>>
    >>>> Regardless, I'm going with Opterons for all our computers in our office
    >>>> and for my personal PCs. There is a definate difference in speed
    >>>> between 32 bit and 64 bit. Most consumers probably wouldn't notice a
    >>>> few seconds difference, but time is money for me in business.
    >>>>
    >>>> --
    >>>> Torrey Lauer
    >>>> Modern Travel Services
    >>>> moderntravel DOT net
    >>>>
    >>>> Rainbow Sky Travel
    >>>> rainbow sky travel DOT net
    >>>> "Nick" <> wrote in message
    >>>> news:...
    >>>>> Some collueages of mine were discussing what it "is" to be a "64 bit
    >>>>> processor."
    >>>>>
    >>>>> AMD64 contains 64 bit registers and 32 bit registers and other nice
    >>>>> internal
    >>>>> registers.
    >>>>> The P4 w/ EM64T contains a dual core processor, but both cores are "32
    >>>>> bit
    >>>>> processors" with software that allows them to emulate a "64 bit
    >>>>> processor"
    >>>>>
    >>>>> The question is: are the only *true* 64 bit processors available now
    >>>>> (Summer
    >>>>> '05) the ones released by AMD?
    >>>>>
    >>>>> Thanks,
    >>>>> -Nick
    >>>>
    >>>>
     
    Charlie Russel - MVP, Feb 10, 2009
    #13
  14. =?Utf-8?B?Tmljaw==?=

    XS11E Guest

    James N. <> wrote:

    > IMO, the average computer users should only care about 2 things:
    >
    > - How fast is a particular processor performs in 32-bit or 64-bit
    > between Intel and AMD and how much power that it used. The
    > internal architecture is at most meaningless to the average users.


    I would add a third thing and that's price vs performance, that might
    be the most important thing for a user looking for a new computer.


    --
    XS11E, Killing all posts from Google Groups
    The Usenet Improvement Project:
    http://improve-usenet.org
     
    XS11E, Feb 10, 2009
    #14
  15. Charlie Russel - MVP wrote:
    > And we all agreed years ago on this newsgroup that we would NOT get into
    > wars on which CPU was better. There's no gain there.
    >


    Over the years I've gotten comments from my customers along the lines of

    My old laptop was a 1Ghz machine, and I bought a new 2Ghz machine, but
    your software doesn't run twice as fast. What's wrong with it?

    A number of years ago, I wrote some CPU benchmarking software to address
    my specific needs as a compiler writer. Over the years, I've added to
    this code. What I now do in response to "1Ghz vs. 2Ghz" or "AMD vs.
    Intel" questions is to send the person with the question a copy of my
    benchmarking software and tell him/her to run it on both machines.
    He/she goes off and spends an hour or two staring at the output and
    reaches the astonishing conclusion that each machine has advantages and
    disadvantages when compared to the other. They next conclude that since
    they don't really know which features are the most important, the only
    way to tell how well a machine is going to perform is to test the actual
    software on the actual machine.

    I could spend 15 minutes on the phone trying to convince them of this
    and never fully succeed.

    As Polya said, people are least likely to remember that which they hear.
    They're much likelier to remember that which they read, but they
    rarely forget that which they discover.

    We all know the name of that tune.

    Regards,
    Jim

    P.S. Please don't ask me for a copy of the software. It's unsupported
    and for internal use only.
     
    Jim Henriksen, Feb 11, 2009
    #15
  16. =?Utf-8?B?Tmljaw==?=

    Guest

    On Feb 10, 7:18 am, "Charlie Russel - MVP"
    <> wrote:
    > And we all agreed years ago on this newsgroup that we would NOT get into
    > wars on which CPU was better. There's no gain there.
    >
    > --
    > Charlie.http://msmvps.com/blogs/xperts64http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/profile/charlie.russel
    >
    > "Bobby Johnson" <> wrote in message
    >
    > news:%...
    >
    > >I care. But, I am also a car enthusiast and all those specs are very
    > >important to me when I'm buying a car. I love the smell of burning tires
    > >and exhaust fumes! I also love the sound of the engine as I'm changing
    > >gears going around curves and up & down hills. And I perform the vast
    > >majority of the maintenance on my car.

    >
    > > Of course I never said I was 'average' either.

    >
    > > James N. wrote:
    > >> IMO, the average computer users should only care about 2 things:

    >
    > >> - How fast is a particular processor performs in 32-bit or 64-bit
    > >> between Intel and AMD and how much power that it used. The internal
    > >> architecture is at most meaningless to the average users. ask yourself
    > >> this, do you care if your car engine has 16 valves or 24 valves or twin
    > >> cam or aluminum head, etc.; or do you care its MPG and how fast it can
    > >> accelerate? These mindless arguments of whether the CPU is 32bit or
    > >> 64bit processor do not mean much. "J.Griffis" wrote:

    >
    > >>> The AMD Athlon 64 X2 is a dual core 64-bit processor.
    > >>>http://www.amd.com/us-en/Processors/ProductInformation/0,,30_118_9484...

    >
    > >>> Intel followed some time later by introducing the Pentium Extreme
    > >>> Edition, which is a dual core model, though I haven't found the
    > >>> definitive answer on whether they are dual x32's or x64's.
    > >>>http://www.intel.com/products/processor/pentiumXE/index.htm

    >
    > >>> "Torrey Lauer" wrote:

    >
    > >>>> Am I mistaken? I thought that Intel had a single core P4 w/ EM64T and
    > >>>> a dual core? I also know that AMD has a dual core 64 bit processor as
    > >>>> well. Is it just on the Opterons or does the Athlon 64's have a dual
    > >>>> core? I know that AMD has the X2, but can't remember if it's 64 bit or
    > >>>> 32 bit.

    >
    > >>>> Regardless, I'm going with Opterons for all our computers in our office
    > >>>> and for my personal PCs. There is a definate difference in speed
    > >>>> between 32 bit and 64 bit. Most consumers probably wouldn't notice a
    > >>>> few seconds difference, but time is money for me in business.

    >
    > >>>> --
    > >>>> Torrey Lauer
    > >>>> Modern Travel Services
    > >>>> moderntravel DOT net

    >
    > >>>> Rainbow Sky Travel
    > >>>> rainbow sky travel DOT net
    > >>>> "Nick" <> wrote in message
    > >>>>news:...
    > >>>>> Some collueages of mine were discussing what it "is" to be a "64 bit
    > >>>>> processor."

    >
    > >>>>> AMD64 contains 64 bit registers and 32 bit registers and other nice
    > >>>>> internal
    > >>>>> registers.
    > >>>>> The P4 w/ EM64T contains a dual core processor, but both cores are "32
    > >>>>> bit
    > >>>>> processors" with software that allows them to emulate a "64 bit
    > >>>>> processor"

    >
    > >>>>> The question is: are the only *true* 64 bit processors available now
    > >>>>> (Summer
    > >>>>> '05) the ones released by AMD?

    >
    > >>>>> Thanks,
    > >>>>> -Nick


    At some point in time, didn't AMD have the only chipsets that could
    reach 4Gbytes (which at the time was a big deal). The older Intel
    chipsets had limitation on the memory controller. So if there is a
    brick wall limitation, it makes sense to discuss CPUs.

    For desktop use, I build using AMD. Intel has an edge in notebooks.
     
    , Feb 12, 2009
    #16
  17. Oh, we all discuss specifics when we need to. Just no religious wars. ;)
    They're the sort of thing that can turn a "family" place like this NG into a
    cesspool like vista.general.

    --
    Charlie.
    http://msmvps.com/blogs/xperts64
    http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/profile/charlie.russel

    <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > On Feb 10, 7:18 am, "Charlie Russel - MVP"
    > <> wrote:
    >> And we all agreed years ago on this newsgroup that we would NOT get into
    >> wars on which CPU was better. There's no gain there.
    >>
    >> --
    >> Charlie.http://msmvps.com/blogs/xperts64http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/profile/charlie.russel
    >>
    >> "Bobby Johnson" <> wrote in message
    >>
    >> news:%...
    >>
    >> >I care. But, I am also a car enthusiast and all those specs are very
    >> >important to me when I'm buying a car. I love the smell of burning
    >> >tires
    >> >and exhaust fumes! I also love the sound of the engine as I'm changing
    >> >gears going around curves and up & down hills. And I perform the vast
    >> >majority of the maintenance on my car.

    >>
    >> > Of course I never said I was 'average' either.

    >>
    >> > James N. wrote:
    >> >> IMO, the average computer users should only care about 2 things:

    >>
    >> >> - How fast is a particular processor performs in 32-bit or 64-bit
    >> >> between Intel and AMD and how much power that it used. The internal
    >> >> architecture is at most meaningless to the average users. ask
    >> >> yourself
    >> >> this, do you care if your car engine has 16 valves or 24 valves or
    >> >> twin
    >> >> cam or aluminum head, etc.; or do you care its MPG and how fast it
    >> >> can
    >> >> accelerate? These mindless arguments of whether the CPU is 32bit or
    >> >> 64bit processor do not mean much. "J.Griffis" wrote:

    >>
    >> >>> The AMD Athlon 64 X2 is a dual core 64-bit processor.
    >> >>>http://www.amd.com/us-en/Processors/ProductInformation/0,,30_118_9484...

    >>
    >> >>> Intel followed some time later by introducing the Pentium Extreme
    >> >>> Edition, which is a dual core model, though I haven't found the
    >> >>> definitive answer on whether they are dual x32's or x64's.
    >> >>>http://www.intel.com/products/processor/pentiumXE/index.htm

    >>
    >> >>> "Torrey Lauer" wrote:

    >>
    >> >>>> Am I mistaken? I thought that Intel had a single core P4 w/ EM64T
    >> >>>> and
    >> >>>> a dual core? I also know that AMD has a dual core 64 bit processor
    >> >>>> as
    >> >>>> well. Is it just on the Opterons or does the Athlon 64's have a dual
    >> >>>> core? I know that AMD has the X2, but can't remember if it's 64 bit
    >> >>>> or
    >> >>>> 32 bit.

    >>
    >> >>>> Regardless, I'm going with Opterons for all our computers in our
    >> >>>> office
    >> >>>> and for my personal PCs. There is a definate difference in speed
    >> >>>> between 32 bit and 64 bit. Most consumers probably wouldn't notice
    >> >>>> a
    >> >>>> few seconds difference, but time is money for me in business.

    >>
    >> >>>> --
    >> >>>> Torrey Lauer
    >> >>>> Modern Travel Services
    >> >>>> moderntravel DOT net

    >>
    >> >>>> Rainbow Sky Travel
    >> >>>> rainbow sky travel DOT net
    >> >>>> "Nick" <> wrote in message
    >> >>>>news:...
    >> >>>>> Some collueages of mine were discussing what it "is" to be a "64
    >> >>>>> bit
    >> >>>>> processor."

    >>
    >> >>>>> AMD64 contains 64 bit registers and 32 bit registers and other nice
    >> >>>>> internal
    >> >>>>> registers.
    >> >>>>> The P4 w/ EM64T contains a dual core processor, but both cores are
    >> >>>>> "32
    >> >>>>> bit
    >> >>>>> processors" with software that allows them to emulate a "64 bit
    >> >>>>> processor"

    >>
    >> >>>>> The question is: are the only *true* 64 bit processors available
    >> >>>>> now
    >> >>>>> (Summer
    >> >>>>> '05) the ones released by AMD?

    >>
    >> >>>>> Thanks,
    >> >>>>> -Nick

    >
    > At some point in time, didn't AMD have the only chipsets that could
    > reach 4Gbytes (which at the time was a big deal). The older Intel
    > chipsets had limitation on the memory controller. So if there is a
    > brick wall limitation, it makes sense to discuss CPUs.
    >
    > For desktop use, I build using AMD. Intel has an edge in notebooks.
     
    Charlie Russel - MVP, Feb 12, 2009
    #17
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Andre Da Costa

    Intel P4 506 EM64T Ready

    Andre Da Costa, May 20, 2005, in forum: Windows 64bit
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    729
    Andre Da Costa
    May 20, 2005
  2. Simo Sentissi

    EM64T xp64 question ?

    Simo Sentissi, Oct 31, 2005, in forum: Windows 64bit
    Replies:
    14
    Views:
    615
    DevilsPGD
    Nov 7, 2005
  3. Simo Sentissi

    Intel em64T with xp64 ?

    Simo Sentissi, Oct 31, 2005, in forum: Windows 64bit
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    367
    Colin Barnhorst
    Oct 31, 2005
  4. Rick
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    429
    Randy
    Nov 10, 2005
  5. Jex

    Intel EM64T

    Jex, Nov 8, 2005, in forum: Windows 64bit
    Replies:
    11
    Views:
    817
Loading...

Share This Page