Date: Fri, 3 Nov 2000 12:54:47 -0800 From: "Jeremiah Gowdy" <jgowdy@home.com> To: "Heredity Choice" <stork@QNET.COM>, "Allen Landsidel" <all@biosys.net>, "Nick Slager" <nicks@albury.net.au>, "jadream" <jadream@chat.ru> Cc: <freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG> Subject: Re: FBSD & Itanium? Message-ID: <001d01c045d8$507dd450$0100000a@netfinity> References: <005001c045c4$8b05bed0$15c6ddd1@STORK>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> Yes, an Athlon 600 is cheaper than an Alpha 21164 533 MHz, and about half
as
> fast.
>
> I am afraid there is a little more to porting an OS than having gcc for
the
> processor, especially as FreeBSD is not optimized for portability. FreeBSD
> will be ported to the Itanium if people want to make the considerable
> effort. So far the Itanium has been all promises and no substance.
Why are we comparing 64bit CPUs to 32bit CPUs ? Apples to Oranges if you
ask me. I say, wait for the tainted smell of vaporware to disappear, and
see who comes out ahead on the Itainium vs Sledgehammer front. I believe
for FreeBSD users, Sledgehammer would be the CPU of choice, as AMD claims
that in 32bit mode, it would still be the fastest 32bit x86 processor ever
released, even if you ignore the 64bit mode altogether. So since FreeBSD is
situated in the x86 architecture quite well, seems like AMD would be the
only option in this next generation of the Intel/AMD offerings. The Intel
Itainium's core is truly emulating x86 (I know all of today's cpus emulate
CISC with RISC, however, Itainium's focus isn't x86), the Itainium will
certainly perform slower per clock than a Coppermine. Willamette performs
slower per clock than Coppermine. So if we say, ok FreeBSD is x86
optimized, what is the x86 cpu market looking like in the next few years,
one has to conclude that the newer AMD offerings, especially the Hammer, are
the cpus of choice for FreeBSD x86 systems. As for Alpha, I've never used
FreeBSD/Alpha, however, I know Alphas are absolutely awesome. My question
is, is our Alpha support awesome ? And are people willing to go Alpha ?
I'm not saying anything against Alpha, I'm just putting forth my opinion
that once it comes out, FreeBSD x86/Hammer combo will be the best option for
FreeBSD x86 users.
Linux will probably come out with both an Itainium and Hammer version. I
believe both such projects are underway. But will they be hack jobs or the
real thing ? FreeBSD x86-64 makes sense, it's just another extention of the
architecture. Ax8664_CPU :)
I have great doubts about willamette and it's design which performs less
per clock than the Coppermine, but allows higher clock speeds. Remember the
486 DX4 ? Then comes the Pentium and all those empty mhz the DX4s were
hitting were stomped by a greater design. Seems to me the idea shouldn't
just be how many gigahertz you can kick, but the design of the core. If you
could make a 386 that clocked to 3 ghz, I would rather have a Thunderbird
that ran at 1 ghz.
My theory is this, if Hammer running in 32bit mode is far far faster than
Thunderbird, and Thunderbird is just a little bit faster per clock than
Coppermine, and Coppermine is faster per clock than Willamette, the winner
is clear. Itainium isn't even entering into the picture, because even Intel
says the x86 emulation isn't going to be very fast. It's more of a utility
thing, it's there, it's available if you need it. I personally don't see
the need for Willamette. They can keep their empty clock speed and all the
heat that comes with it.
Oh, and one more thing, think about the price difference. How much cheaper
do you think the Hammer will be than the Itainium ? And how much more
production will AMD have ?
AMD Athlon Thunderbird 1 ghz $254
Intel Pentium III Coppermine 1ghz $469
AMD Athlon Thunderbird 1.1 ghz $350
Intel Pentium III Coppermine 1.1 ghz RECALLED
Intel Pentium IV Willamette 1.5ghz $1139 (If you can get ahold of one)
What makes Intel CPUs worth twice as much money, the inferior performace ?
:)
Sorry this got off on an AMD vs Intel Jihad, but I truly can't take any of
Intel's upcoming offerings, even the Itainium, seriously. It's time for IT
Managers to stop buying Intel CPUs rather than AMDs because of the brand
name and the "stability". People with old memories of K6/K6-2 cpus, can't
seem to wake up to the fact that Intel cpus are the ones having the heat and
stability issues. I won't even go into the rambus fiasco. If you happen to
work under an Intel Only IT Manager, you know what I'm talking about.
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?001d01c045d8$507dd450$0100000a>