Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sun, 06 Feb 2005 12:12:39 +0100
From:      "O. Hartmann" <ohartman@mail.uni-mainz.de>
To:        freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: Intel EMT64 Xeon vs AMD Opteron
Message-ID:  <4205FBA7.6010504@mail.uni-mainz.de>
In-Reply-To: <20050205221808.GA9350@dragon.nuxi.com>
References:  <000001c50a3c$50f2eba0$6800000a@r3140ca> <20050204103708.21608.qmail@web26801.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> <2fd864e05020419382a5e21b3@mail.gmail.com> <42044AAF.1010002@freebsd.org> <20050205221808.GA9350@dragon.nuxi.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
David O'Brien schrieb:

>[ Please don't cross post! ]
>
>On Fri, Feb 04, 2005 at 09:25:19PM -0700, Scott Long wrote:
>  
>
>>Astrodog wrote:
>>>From what I understand, EM64T is essentally an extention to x86, so
>>    
>>
>>>it will understand the AMD64 instructions, much the same way an
>>>Athlon64 does. Opteron, once again, from what I've read on the topic
>>>is "Actual" 64-bit, not an emulated version.
>>>      
>>>
>..
>  
>
>>Both the AMD and Intel offering are just extensions to the ia32 design. 
>>Opteron is no more 'true' 64-bit than Nacona is.
>>    
>>
>
>Just as the i386 was just extensions to the 80286 design, which was just
>extensions to the original 8086 design. ;-)
>
>And just as the UltraSparc (Sparc v9) is just extensions to the 32-bit
>Sparc v8.
>
>Astrodog, I'm courous, what is the definition of a True 64-bit CPU?
>
>  
>
Maybe in honor the digital Alpha AXP?



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4205FBA7.6010504>