Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Intel Plans A Common Socket For Xeon, Itanium

timothy posted more than 10 years ago | from the common-ground dept.

Intel 157

stonedonkey writes "According to EE Times, Intel is planning a common system platform for the Xeon and Itanium by 2007, "creating a unified 64-bit motherboard with a new, one-size-fits-all socket." Intel's Jason Waxman says , "It has been something that customers have been asking us for for a while now...the reseller [currently] has to have an inventory of both boxes on hand." Feeling the heat from the competition, cutting losses, or just friendly customer service?"

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Not exactly new news... (5, Interesting)

halo1982 (679554) | more than 10 years ago | (#9819355)

The Inquirer reported on something just like this [theinquirer.net] nearly a year ago. Of course this is actually confirmed with a date, but the Inq still has a bit more information.

Re:Not exactly new news... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9819701)

but unfortunately slashdot had to post this story in THE BEIGE OF THE END TIMES [slashdot.org] so nobody read it and just had their eyes bleed and burst into fire like an AMD chip in an Intel socket instead.

That'd be the competition (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9819357)

AMD is coming!

Common socket, gmpf! (5, Funny)

c0wan (790723) | more than 10 years ago | (#9819359)

You still can't stick an AMD in there.

Re:Common socket, gmpf! (1, Funny)

Doppler00 (534739) | more than 10 years ago | (#9819411)

and what if you could? Doesn't mean the pins would have the same function.

It sure would be funny though to read about all the people who bought an Intel motherboard and plugged a AMD chip into it only for smoke to come out.

Re:Common socket, gmpf! (1)

Schrambo (737251) | more than 10 years ago | (#9819423)

yeh I once did this many years ago, mistook an AMD Socket A mobo for an Intel 370 FZZZTT!!!

Re:Common socket, gmpf! (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9819435)

Haha, what a dumbass.

Re:Common socket, gmpf! (3, Insightful)

shaitand (626655) | more than 10 years ago | (#9819522)

Someone talking about how "many years ago" he mistook a socket A for a 370. Sheesh.

I remember not so many years ago when intel and AMD processors really did use the same socket... I wish history would start repeating itself real soon, I'm sick of different sockets.

Re:Common socket, gmpf! (5, Insightful)

NoodleSlayer (603762) | more than 10 years ago | (#9819749)

If I remember correctly the reason why the Athlon and P4 have different sockets is because the two use radically different FSB technology, and between the Athlon 64 and P4 it would be nearly impossible.

Moving to their own socket was perhaps one of the best decisions AMD made for the Athlon, it allowed them to create their own technology instead of having to follow Intel's lead as far as motherboard design goes.

Of course to top it all off Intel claims that all of its bus technology is "proprietary", this is why nVidia hasn't made an nForce chipset for the P4 yet. AMD on the other hand has a much more open policy and actively encourages 3rd party motherboard and chipset makers. A policy which has worked very well for AMD to date.

Re:Common socket, gmpf! (2, Informative)

MojoStan (776183) | more than 10 years ago | (#9819863)

Of course to top it all off Intel claims that all of its bus technology is "proprietary", this is why nVidia hasn't made an nForce chipset for the P4 yet. AMD on the other hand has a much more open policy and actively encourages 3rd party motherboard and chipset makers. A policy which has worked very well for AMD to date.
Intel's NetBurst bus may be proprietary, but I don't think that's the reason NVIDIA hasn't made a chipset yet for the Pentium 4. Intel has licensed the bus to other 3rd party chipset makers like ATI, SiS, VIA, and ALi and they have all been shipping P4 chipsets for some time.

Here are some current examples:
ATI RADEON 9100 PRO IGP [ati.com]
SiS SiS648FX [sis.com]
VIA PT800 [via.com.tw]
ALi M1681 [ali.com.tw]

I don't know why NVIDIA doesn't make nForce chipsets for the P4. Maybe NVIDIA doesn't want to compete with Intel in making chipsets

VIA was / is being sued by Intel (2, Informative)

charnov (183495) | more than 10 years ago | (#9820876)

VIA has had several lawsuits going with Intel over their P4 chipsets. VIA says it has a license from when it bought S3 (the video card company) and Intel says, no, hence the lawsuits. Also, Intel used to make most of its own motherboards and chipsets up until the PIII when they started licensing. The Taiwanese chewed them up on chipset and motherboard business and generally ignored the scope and letter of the licensing agreements. When Intel went with the P4, they really clamped down on the license.

yuck (1)

mihal (753927) | more than 10 years ago | (#9819619)

220V plug won't work either am I doing something wrong?

Re:Common socket, gmpf! (4, Interesting)

dpilot (134227) | more than 10 years ago | (#9820512)

(sorry to add a serious comment to a joke)

The sockets diverged back in the days of Slot1. Intel didn't want to compete on the socket level, like back in the Socket7 days, so they tied things up in patents and such. That's what drove AMD to the SlotA, which they got from Alpha. Theoretically you could have motherboards into which you could put either a K7 or an Alpha, by changing the BIOS.

Actually, that same trick seems to be what Intel is trying to pull, here. But what seems and what is may be two different things. With today's market positioning, Xeon and Itanium are sold into different markets, and those markets would drive radically different types of boards.

So we have four possibilities:
1: Intel is trying to enable Itanium to creep downward into the Xeon market.
2: Intel is trying to enable Xeon to creep upward into the Itanium market.
3: Intel is confused, and trying to hedge their bets.
4: Beancounter have gained some ascendancy over the marketdroids, and have gotten fed up with the costs of 'socket differentiation.'

Bukkirani yoroshiku! (-1, Offtopic)

B64 (798953) | more than 10 years ago | (#9819362)

From B64 to you. To decode: base64 in.txt out.png
Get base64 for Windows and Unix <a href="http://www.fourmilab.ch/webtools/base64/">he re</a>.

iVBORw0 KGgoAA AANSUhE UgAAAN oAAADqC AMAAAD zuatE AAAD AFB MVEUAAAA IAAAFAg kQAAAA
CA4 JCgA YAgUOC AYRCA ACEAoEEQ MTBxAiA gMfBAMYC AEcBgI oAg EAE xUuAQIQ EAk VDggNF AAVEgAZ
EAAZDw 8hDgI0A wokDQIe EAMoDAEd EgA5B QRB AwQ xDAEDHyU NHRs qEBIa GRo eGRAVH hIhGgk
iGwEjFxY pFR YnGA4tFg 0xFQs iGS EtGQ Y1FgExG QE4FB g8FQlaC wAJLD UXK iISL C5F GwQcKDQ
gKCtOFwo 7JA EoK CAqK RhCIQM/ IBE2Ixw

6IRw pJjA wJh03JR MvJig9Ix M4IylZF hdKIBY1L xhfHw ReHwt LLA YYO0MbOz wpOC 9OJ yY7Mit
oIwE6Mj IqOTs2N itCMCtO LxJ IMB5PLRx FLj RDM iU7MzpKL yhdL QFa KxRY LSIiSFA qSE orSV
ddOidI Qjc/R jta PSRX PDJUPy xGQz9aPS xMQzNJ QUhgPR 9TQDNd PDRSQ EBVQTp pPCd7NSA 6TF
l+OwO ILi9 ETE9qQx gvVVxQ TDN+Oi 92Qho7 VldqRyhW UkBh TkFpS UZqR05oS 0FoT TlvSjdVU
05WVEdj TkdZ UFh uS0 NgUE 95S DiVSTSm QjdqX VNT ZWhrX0 93W0l+ WEZiY1lo YF15 W1B 0XF ppX2iI
V0eBXT psZk2IV1 WgT0a QWzSYVU uhXB2ZX

yu0VxGNZ DZtbWSbW 1xxcl5 9bV55bmp 1bn WLaVWJ al+XZVS Ga2S Ea2 yAa3 iUZ WXAaSi1b jWtc
zi4 cCyed1mC gmuHfn Wod0e BgYGUe nOIf YSBg3eed 2qYem uMfXy mdGvAaW CVe3u 0bm2be XmpeHinf
YPGfzuch pLBgVCTk XmSk YaYjJ Wji oKdj Iuki Yy6i VKT kZPBi EqriIn LhE2r jH24 jF+q jZu1kG
2jm Ken mqGqmpqp mK2 ymZCtm KezmJ q7k 5+i oZy6lp ixmaOgoa imn 6u2mar WmFn NnG q6oJ CvqJiqrZ
Gyp7Gns Z/LpYOr s5y 9qK azsa/Bw rvLv MPRv bXHx7XJ ztfV2NHw 4MDg 4ODw8PD/ ///xj TzoA
AAg AElEQV R42u 2dC1BUR9 b4b08 zD4R5IHx ZWCUI LLqLIJ igYDREQM BoMg FleQgBV B4qjw BBE2NMxE
AElOB G5Z1sEp NaE nkIu puJLg/ BZdXyk1 dR/CmLQa 6r41 ilgQK SmHwJ /+57 78zcea C8WVLpV
AYY 587t35 zTp885 fbq HkP5q G/Eb2m 9ov6H9h vYb2m9 ov6 H9hka1N dSj m43E hv4b 8ngS9GOd
ZOHC2 UbzIojJ AVu7GXqW hx9M0XsK Vc9AuEg olu6 0kYg3zgH ahNnEYgg hT2xqq/ 30Ur CIugvzl
khuQn9/ PgBAaC qVPoueF LFeHAaAC ADuDKIRx MOjE2 XjQZFr pLe VmMczZT2 7EvVUTY aEZmp rLVw
OCY LDAQBC fBVBQNWL LQH6aMS LAX3JT KEN DV2YGJs p75 loq m10 RrJTKygk IAI SEwCj8Z Ai8i
hIDn5A Qv7Di5 ZAxWYJ AP0O0SIg mCk0AqMN DU2AbaeY F47 6FBHxOn oMEwOoG lJUv30 Iup lAgt2
Q2Hi OGI0Avl IpAEHo2 gQabpp 00hDaO xjtAU HYjlcbe X7R0a +XkKi11 0TudYLUA IKAEpU z6j
sg9BtSPG DJp34V CCA MSy/tR Nf3t WRhNvOZ QrswR DXX8QoOW kVHHyPpp ujPzIy Ei7Ec KLWjIY
jHNgC9 w9J JVcO iB4aGCTE NaN/SaE PPj+/dRD A6Op8BQ/ 8/qE4MF0 PAZ0 nnSWji sFpS 06LDowV
AHwy1V 6aMNqRq7 4yLDRkA3 2ZW18 iahGixiM 9SvSe QOYa1 sC8nv fXEhsT v6CQiC LcpoRE stPEZSgt
R9F6FVt9 aoqOhSAX 0BDCCME /v0LqarE FoDlp9 gqK

EhMSEBI Inn Brab g3a0I1 xsAFR ZL1238i +dG/4R CQG DCT pXEzeRp 8M0CKDCX Rz5dl OCe2r oYmxoaH
Sx3T q2vnz 9C8D r4bB 8aGBIOb aWjeb 35+jf82K 9tZCIxBV WmYaelzM mxJaI xtt6Ksns gHRMUY
ft0 o2LTS lLYLcWz wuNhDGy NnUTf ruJoa tFAmd 1TWC SNx7hu wj208l +C1+fipo Q9rtieM N8Bk
j8uzvT 396eqc ki/ qj2dtqP CoJ6HH WZr1E +pcPP90k of7qTI /URou mP6++M2k iOI1oQ98 +gY2woP
Vx65J PP0TtuPB 96s9 8EeA+Ga 2Yeu1 N8dbT+O JPbbZ Sgy09 DKM5q m4gzFLN mrWLpxX tSU4X 4NOf/O9
Pf0i1d 01p tovg yWL zZOT9 7L9wQ 9fSYj sWhsYa sFR 1yV rlEJCKM PDMZNE IInRog mwAV OC7nl+Hs
HAH// 2JkN afii ej1VEvf J/3 L7p9+ K6Q Gra lGI0PnJk +mapn dMW58 TvPxGNt/ 7jGm0hA 3fm K5MNP
qf79++ pWnh w/M 2L5RMvf i152 jnz/f ZJh+9L0O mUtEZo FIJ ar0Eo1Mw OHO3m0 9wygDf3 1MW wQUG7WFZ
vTNNm/r 117vww 9EQw A50lswf4 bOJCkcK iLP5FQN rI5TGD OVcdyBMF GA5NH +8oQGv K5nMfWS
Art9sJ PUN+uXr1 6Df3 xokl KlD+fM w4Ty fFX9/o/ 6HphA 0n2y jt8q XEKfZg +1bDQ LKYb7XH DDdI
fqh ChXS P/Q/c gyoQ/ vimb7 y9vOFe2w YSS 1r+u8Hop K8+g0R8n sZKF5j AFhbx gGK11b DYQRd30
1Wf/ 1a1y/9 GnS4yzAT 7gcDgu bbQ fIqSt xR8BHRI waO0a NII/7WhD Y+dL+JC 6afofqB 8mHJ MUf9RZYt
xsaEzmMd 6jD/1W Cgs62qMH G7GChQ ZCJ49 2Ywy0G +8ZZIM 4bUV9 5G2Q8kr k/hyTiZB RdC5y uuPp9
BTeJ9 BC26 gJD eRc6c vTjvb tV+WG 2PA0 A+gP3ZEJ lS0AM

dEG ONDEBFI iw4O tA2 ihRWt ipkogffn l6UYbul Aeqc+G YheER 1u5Xkp4 ZyZBhi0 lGm 95CKu3lz
XZM 2g+mlA 1BaO9 PEm0b8 dCGy ovDzKMBg B124a8 XnmZgA/ 4xKTY TJRqgHw GDTBS 0yikC 7Ii k0a78Rg
0PZVczK fQLBvo+w JLM CmR 0WxRlV 1dXZRu +2uhWWuk NgAhBG B8bBNBu4 HZdOw +lWgi iBT mM50CG
WpcLgEc ulgzB0az 5vEWic XLaTfS BUYmJD gB/stTR bug43bp o6knXtw hssuRmG rjU7bW RcUq
lYp 5GzMz0

yKd oCP SyiiQn 4kTCeCP L09xXns Jv/0 7Wmi+h EE04J hUjHxG/ pTR uP4oG MhT u8++gJfc VF3dQXa
UAj CcD5rJ9g KK7X dTRFPd4 YLaRp bvJQy R4Wm XT+ UbwZ ThLDiq kUZwARC V1rfTE 3YHh I5U9FQd
kZDgDa YJTe1Y6 mqklk9 BTEfjE nyOCd C8aaTGOP YBRzxnk2 QTYoPTh sYM QYz mahh tGpva lQHAN5O
VxMuDA xQa WZKQIJ oa2g3tO9 7QN /+aH Oq4E 6oT8lHA Lq20 tAnj ajahwTZ xNG9 WUHNK 504v obFWvou
Ycalp0H5 3Qiv3 auLCo KUl QP6E0dhp n/f0bx Z04g RbI2cYje 97UQv NxYR 2MfsTEy KRh ZlC9vg9Q
7fL1dJIO KNogl3 aqwGQkV p7g mtCg hW0niBap EZsoWP cUWsN G8woWp8 WGs+R ybR itA TeExYAD
C1CnT FgIOcEDe ylQ jQmli PPgQZG ajDzQWJ COM96 Msv040KT rJGuA DOIB gA2/ YoyF3KA Cr2h
iSowEA 1jKwnF E0crfz ya6hp ColrX nSE 0Pj2rcej ciw nsp cka XHB m9li CAE y4kEklN vU9Ok4Y
RjNlfP8Z kxqzj swxaZ BfF8 Ll9LR Wxs HZr/7m 3KUTRwtj MsiqW/j Sa1 H6aFjZ p3eO 1glOmVip
bTnkQXF aGkyor 81/0eUm bUxOcImJ l58 RxAg bjV4 FuPGS LhsB caKQO51 i0vG48 tRLyDVNi duyw60
l4vx zque CCO5k0 ILYaKc Ys/LwHR0 0xGYp NZ9 BjUzRLAI PN20M z06Ih irPq0+xl Os5iaJ BgrjIQvu
rVu5f g7aGgI BvMZP G35E 9q1V vjK6v5f mo/jwB+ JOph4ygL IluuK aKvAlV/ p+Yk VmNw 1JQ lne
suJ 2QpS BbI LMgN Sxa 7DupUk9b 4oQGT SdF8pJa bDPrZuF kHb3SraD zkNSybz qvjC4u gRN2j1kT
wBhomng UTt kIPqm J2dUod Aa3DE Tl+fuLx JMu0N1J 7B0L7Y I6Q+IsmC m7r xZbt AatVLXK ZsIJT
n+Sb/y42 mOCODE GGhLb CUKTqzO 8+OLA5+ t0l 2v+2BU Ng24N TIBZ arTrLAn WQrf Jo7FiM X20Ym
Lj2Gw4 +QO S9NPjnj REmP4VD nw2msa MQJ+S BFhK6rd maO 01BTQp 2xnR ao2anJ2 B+gm KjJ9b rO6r6i
VJj MvL1YXm JvGphJie zMS ZJUd 84IssK 0n/6H DmbZZO Bc1L1SW9 VUQsN tVCD TBAZ gFAsKb 8QIVWx
KA5 Uf9iZKRZ 0A7m83 n+lkBb agBAXN

aa5fOijs jkpe LxkD 22zp +51V FdtEF W9k d/ZgPA sTjXH 83laqk F0ZIsX4 oEA5w YtJC 19MeAl
3wdLX lle f4mQKcA 1DkroaRG u54wj 5f/Io9 nOq7iwcd 6mMynP WRAI9 VrNkDf IuSOjBR bdClV
fgq 3kcq 9gqIkn IiNTBN Tl6 x1YIT sUFfhnz 7Qdu5V9q eEPgMgC suqv31 buxyRTIf Q1HardM pot
tRty g2t2eQSY 6R+AN+/ eUAeBZ XKPMY0g PJcQB EXoQdBZ KRIpY9G+ NXmlffk ZVFt befy eNqfE
HTa W9KvZ 0BqoWTr ZunU0a TaU iPUVXfl5 UW0R krCddg4K Mjq 62vwr1Qq lUnINu BeLi3H mshP
Qj+ AUxqFxnF woKyNQ1K dUtnWEJX Sdv3 cizpoe7M 69W0 j5O2 cQp2/Lp tqsWY Xdc/3HqJ f76gGmy
l0RC/ia KZcDr BsRmi YTKksw3s VEEA zNoEg SMk HAt/MN D7OD7ugM Wbhn 1Q+g l/XVl ambGvz 57NsiAB
EJtTr k6V AiXS a0FZqJ DXkz

YrfGp lUq y0E/g4Ea 1GeA4 P7+vrkF Nm9kXsp JpjN X4nkJ 3i6NQjZ xzOZfPT 6yjKOQ1 JxRd29
e9Qr lb1KpTy fNdYE wCm yxIDQXhS umy 40VinyC EtdQnfv 3kWJz VYvMga 5d+ 7cocmY buPmj 9mK
W4FjR0 exJW HJGSC76 piXqRob Db06 LbJeYWC kWe+YN jRNfuui oeyPrV5 EApK 6VF1m oVVyci1B
rjy9 TN7 XHJyX4q IkNf92 T43PGm l+aVkG vJDl cKt0+tB WEq/Ra MV6aGh2 2Wyru8g CLIu77tx
T6jQ5 p0x O6V1 bW5 tyICWv Tansqs yL2hCVp3 mpo8YfA YvT0m pIA0Kb UsW4 dKxM eZDB pN1OqIP
Gp60e3Vz QKDQ70I V+i2KD NjQo lQO4bo Zj5HByg H6uLc oCWDrQgx aIIg2RIa FJpxUN Rdw Px8
hKYh d1kZb vh6SGD H65 Wg2N NtgThFml XKn XAL9y ZHS07sC GFOa1

Kf5JxY xOo inCkDqW QtvpRcN Wcqy EK+1qATa aY1Bu1 4iSMv5 lRs8pR38 a/dm Y0C eDYf2lz aOI7eS
GPEpo DW3fy5P 4jNC8 jxmw ISSck NDGt VfU VStT8p 72aNN2 Izkc2D wwMF K5AXeXk /Lz 6Oh3u Rd/Tge6Z
K+anp dIxM4 do6Pf v7kBfw 6Vl XL5PQf6 nQRW e2sNk OXDFdOO tpKatj U5oK90 EpLL ActAQlB cpywz
QXYi6r kfR0cboJ D37DFhr Q7as8 KF6za tMzVtGB 390cQFP ZHXIJe bOPC5KE wQ8COPGS Aje RMT2vh2+
Ibj4 cZe01 YvmNog /9hN 6ghU 7gg Hux0py A0xUS qN7v04 2ia0 WbV piY0kS wfNV LIKNx vJwOiPl
ZzKyqgou dzFx SHYAb uZ3s c6SENCk8 4Am jSZINp 1Q+7 XGLEB YG2l QXOAMK oB2Q8T TpTZT6 Ojyxd
igk0 Ld2 qTXR fbUG irJO8js W0wcX HJky vLyrqCz ZGH5bT XkHW

Ui2cGDYW lzvrZhIv 0aG OnNTgO+ d8PDC jlEPKJk z+PdvB ogoU SbbRz4q2 r1i3B 0JL vR39O4XB
M0E XKAR QrcPm/iz xmgIx8da Jk495 ybj CbgJ 3kHVJbNh qfH5xSN6 BMAf 5E3eho+ kKs dJJVOyVX
tNBKeVvd hDY2 mxBa 2+j PZQ 4mZd9Tcw UA5uCl yHY DZB1QPFN oUoOJ EsSGR puIbU YAMKkcGB hw5HNb
R0ej l6w SOjfx Vq607lb I5XIWWr Tgtf /bjLTS rQyhud ShK9oqT TgO5uD pxFOGhO Y/Ya FN4KA
AQ+ mtwXI/sX akz eU7lCH VGhhw cEB SW7hkF e/UaKI 4XN ituN0 px0 2Jb KeyV hgN zoy Kf48 GW8Poz1
F5Srl yoG0D xwTN95H hpMEUlt UMo i0kdI rRaLHB56 nkjz oRktSBhD PQiw LtutFfJ JtW/d 7r/4S
2Wxd2d3 ei1 tHRgQ IeufK66V aJ2xrJ klVLFra N/sgpG 8BB TYOJC4SR kU2G0J wmL rSJHO/A LtZis
+G9 JyLGlnC 5xUhi SvTf QNnJH 3/Zik yFxGbhz oVb uxFbe3t 7U1NH 38D1+ zeffX anjc26V auW
SEZHuz gDv b20by lcl JBFGpjTT kwg Ap0 MmtQw mitmo4 pLKbj gEQat8 sCPP2 Ezss5 m07 qFn3R
39z Th1 lNf e7tTcf9 9yVb adL46 +vOG Db29NF ueY3RCi wGZ9 U3chk wQT UoYqH EtL6eqb myFeK
2Ni0x kFxXEDAz 0JZWPD ovXYY AlSB8vIa yqw sLC6p KWzs673V slO zct2bz QeviX So584N atW4it
LXh5Q oIhd QybhDpO EG0jt iLf 6rGp3sP X1wHNUN gj7F Xcv Ttcmj4ye gRP2TZL znZXNTV VFR6OiI+
PL6y+gt iu2khs Ngu3/vJL hwl eQ0Nov QMNjsvDa wwa fus ZR0O O8l/12 BrpDJAp DwrM cVAT fE8pv
3nt2tXz VxJ8Mp MlS5as W7iu6 dKlnqr 1K6ytn 1/v tqaw6t KVu3cv 79zsV jJck 7U8//bt mzcR2i
1lmaV3wm 0Da D6TEtpET 4lhaeSN rxobWx mx2dI aiXx bI8BvQ GT/ /vL L08d 3enltzt m3ZM fZjy5V
NRVk u7r 6Jb4Wbh 1RWP XJpR70T HZVlVdEw pH6+u5 rN2+Stw aUUSC sxq DhXzE baKzCO93 AzQ07V
3ifdXFH5 9V/ f/rpW9Kd a/Y d35eTc7z wQU9BZ tPFzMjI1 3b5+ hVU V1e f7y kpKcj euC05B7 Wzl
69eQ

2hKuQNwM jTSRJMT 2sTP 9hmjzImq WsfrL QIQ1 HLl/J effvjGu1 I3mx1nc 6py Snr6 6+v7fuh zBJa
W/vkdHS 3VVz4oQa 0gJ 37fjn37j n95/h piG 8jj80 UGyLzF0l lCkxIv GSxzo oJS CESicM eS85+
c/v Qvb7wh3b Hv7O We9v b6+ pqW jr6+gYa 8qJS yNnlfXy cykrUt7 e2X ctaskR5 /9zRiQ2 iOIBHqZ
1U7Jks2 GTSGbcx6 O2H0B wza8bO XL3ffvV sbHVbb1y eX97 Zdv4 4t4c CAvI28f/ 9ud/ fl4zukb7
xBoQ3U QqdE uFeXTC GGs4cm9 aPTd5 5jlhI6 U2h/efc NjHbtW ndn7Y u1mKyXv HUfW /ne gd6yc/
fv3/8P mu2On/7L XzDa7WF v8fM fbxPqo qULpb OIxmyVD TWU 36Ja9N bzX+ Ien0Zky ELcvK 9Id8xv
aJArSS SrW7d w+JLX cOvW/Zvd WG7o dQhtOJ 1n/bbsY 57elGY7 q2h0N SiD Fnnj1Au6 coN bL395+
vTpj y5fRW SKm4qB BmRhg MureWXnz rWh VplSiR2Q W4jt8l n0wi+ v3q2F i97+WvY 3iX asN jx5dZzs6
WcEcWKok R3lXHjnB Ybte WjOBe Ks8 2e// OgTZPm 6kbMrH +jz Z6r LIORw LFC4+ j3yiH tvkZ0 U2pe
Xr7 WIF78ik 8n+a fuBzk KhdL bREF v/k G4Ad4PeF PWn F3YfNV 9ecv nyJ +evXOu+q SCVvfKBd Eut
pVwUU2O XuLfzy tXzZy+ f7+52hs /8DaHJ JFpoL Tzp7KM hhI 4g3di0MV T151Gwv OZKdS0aZ zdxiKKUn
2OhQctz DBl5 /cr 585cv99 Rbw mfeln2N 0NZEa+VU hXOBp

lkLZZ2Z cGc3Q vvuzn etu/4Il 9e0XOm8 qVBQd ZlK9b YtfA BVFEOG0W pLrrQ fsw TPI3X cj9F82J
P1lIQ 2hZMGDV XMt CK2n4ZaB 4t8fZ2X l3Z2Ih OCpdbb Kw/WrM LwlCq0 m9dbU MviQb+ ViAyjr
Xdm r8tI 5whNfayZ VklJEv V36y 5iO FqY1 Xld0X YTk ynlxXx i4RIbCU ZTk/X K25qbSx3 FJa5IHb/
48+ c6aEA8Z2 gqwZ3S CnG KCaJ xxNMXESL 0DmzqcQ h9r0 tMbHpr1R IJAa JYaM35QY 5L24f EtrL//T
MWm mzNRk 0efGrqON WjL+ ldR FrhW4VK 8fbmE/6 gsq1 NTq HdCbN5C 7WFhM kAXkG kUgbyym BHC1zf
wDs s2/9nTCZ zU6Ol T5Vsqqd6 Gkooa1pz M9+ yGXtYC

K3U5 q1V b71lK pJTa/L I2ZKX+Vt aBOFC4 ESh TLb ucwrNNpk ha5hcZD 2Na FI8Azx Ua6MWGFL KpCQ
Agut 6lW0NX R1/2P TWW5 vEzUq85i tvOxeF axMs TlCH46 2Ur aPUE c1r mZNc lpkBNCy3 1wxGp4ir
wnNp qDk gHFIaU ipaK4 QLb YRKZVd FcVlKs CWw 5NN H9bU OPYSHD2 3/giL7m+ pkkeVTJ5 sSmhVO0
Pn6ai pL9Co gR4qOF u02Jj iWLsF1 d0b2hiG y3OBgR 0vgmB 8koq cCz6Gj8O Pt+7+m0 FKJSS44T
S+aNYRW fn5+Tt7 pBL GLXQ9E tV0PL ybt4pYPt T4cL CLMAY/ wLK LWgKM cHY OCci sqg gBdnSYI
GhK4vq 0WGoWm6 OBJ5 xIN isP DEVla aXMz GQTMtcV 29NHPPz 0qTwqln n60DE /X3G Weng4mJi aWvs
WtF0/4q lauQ FcX 2LN9v4 oshSnE mkM0W/HG jT4+0TV M6VsxAI2 szXxF 5Y2tDx9 91x jKpTb ntF
Iri 567PQ+4 mEARECx d+lTo V+XvPU3V Q1a IYCpN9j Z6VeU0 mZD Jo5 kKI7x8E lo0Sc M+PvDVi
O3ow xd2FzV+ 91N5KJ feG QBxsVl5X Z0/Ve O66+hXjc iqPvJFf 4kcodU rlDru wVe2 USVm0rlD
E7rFu 71eqx0 P5wKQq 84q DA3t3pW b2/r wKF1xeIO qmw nu8lyK/C 3C8+ HQIJ13Bo RIJHZe 8Ta2Ia74
JS7 U7mvp3K HxIry8 9FNPONxU ic0 TzXF Hc5PKv/ J8ioLw wxppPr o0aZQ PCE DVjiK6 ImAB YNYK039
Sww y3KLxD QTp3aD yviCOG UqFkGx YNwVS+Dg 62Fu 167x1jl XwI/tJ G7nej ZxCayn 1JEgD+ 3mj
hYZns MGN +8Pkw0 rlD E/pEa0R 2SxuuUj2 jDWKxN F64QBe KDiJ7KD AnLv40 chHp JpdB Mwd OvmlEs
uxj9ZRBk tN4nPt E32oz j02mU/+ AJ9s g7Q D1pf+hfg gESCN fuHF KgA+LBb RXthQ4 +SFNLS3Q
VMWT xByi8VY k1J CPa+1 72aUzQ0 M0mie2 /y/ 8iXvqBzE kAF4F8 RRAv8TwP a5s7yV lOs kmi iYUH
sl+M DYX XTN JxwO tzCxOG Y0iIBB8F Xrh0d DQY kgIc hs9A fALD1+/ fv22 Mbd8zzY azAyPWB8 enlxSq
l8YXKHum ypr8tW Nbx8tK 6ftCGD ig6eRW RQIgFNmO Hqn9Wv2O M0U 2QTRoHN yxBrbb fHr3 by8j
mgP uXQA9 dMme PGbmsN2q 13oUFy tsCs tLSG8o Confl9 E+EyRT QyN B48kR2 zbti 1+T 3xyToT X6/W3Nbl
QZ0MZIcK P2SW wLFd9 qp/5U q4g LHNvZklB YdWlwv8W NPGi5 Ij4+Jw q3Jqaq j/IulILc ZY+n RjjW
JzMkn CIrP+j PwImV l1A hN7xxC VmJ+ rba6pL qi8VJLv +V6D B7I Ls6qb2/v b69gft7 Z23W2prS
1/kEXC R4Swe4 Z2dnewHB Who wcW ZZ8pfMF 6woKj8p1 w0xwE YNvzDD+ 019f1V 6/8 bxpoT LKiq6u
+8rV CQt2/fHl CgNjxM 1hLWY yQoicTs Hak5qdue f35P9i IIBeaDo 41FRT+V U6d aArF3xy/ fd3b
0JP43oAm e7u np0 TGLN8

nvX7Udg8 wvO3XHjh 2HUduTE/ 96sh9of XTxRO5 35QJsIpO SLK Bj2 fff PyhgoVn PFRpI NDi llWpn5g
lZtkpoe1 JTU/ fty6kq zCk szCk 45QT wtt mkpVhqfK I8t9if cPH/Y dhXTbaHt 2Ku0C6 S2U6Lg
T91tE llm3 oPv4S9 OUm4Xu0T Zu/BZ Gd7ep p6ei5 Vl2SeQmi qeicQ2p pbVE6ZG n8VWarsF eGcoD
mLRad OLRa5+ gLH1goII PBXwVmz vsBF aPNP2T duLLT Cnp72 fvLu 3e7Oj jPF+ OQ3 es8 DwD 5ycRJ7B
nwbxT aSuUCDY oiC/zREs hdAkV9m ZhqEFUw 1DmuwCT /7x37ZIb qvyf GH9 xX2 k7dU4 YFC Yan+Qg0
BFztidS yybCox bjr7aMha H0u nJj FyuBRGV 3/wQUL BnwQ 36A38mq2 b1rYy2 f5/f L2Oyoxn 79txtgcv
7N5So dUy21SQH wnuDGnY docS LyRi tP+VzDo aACfq+4d fpQ 8mLRV TPlb TSyDRD/ 8ij tBM6mt
kn+//x +fb X0H9PZKz 7/jlux TXrfv M1mPq6 08EWGi0 53VH 5W0e fUogxuu iUsnso hFc+h sF0mm0
F+n1vf 4zi/0SfG rJdlY yQ3w Io/3jE M5OHY lHJuQ2u 55Mo WgAnlz ABbiaq5G d3mt8e OEd kfU/Zb
JDt rOKBk DQ4 kjKt8ej S0H6LK ctY/8i 53ZhO8m qw+SZ ymR/37/ //3 2xPZUg CuL3V bXr VspZ5j4
6WrQ7NP SF3bup qCeX QUNO9LfP rEEaKZx NNA hyL5 6gz u0dP nERE ZG1qr37 YjEpr F/E6gx0o 9G+3v
4xR svpGda ptlVUAFV FdtGWcs 1gC0Vo gzck2JDA WUQDw ZgC L3w NP2g6Uv L6kZK SWjpagy K8T5r9K
WxHaJ/ /+fP/PX QYoe3J6 VEobm m0kez rU5 C/U2 VGBh t3I538j tHIQcy2A l0u 480iG p/6t pXopu
q06ITwiI iI5O TkFdFZLS 1kB7 +YLN b6kOF nMkpsX3 yGFDI7 ubBHIWd OeCGHW+ rrS2qq q5uA+mt
H7uQW Dw0x vshDxDaY jcXm NptSs8C 9q09E c1l1dXVV Vfa 2gmx8 OMG wLy BJXy00 3hcq NCS17I
KqHgXV hm/XH 4n28nJb7 7bGqy lNoF5 oHCnP/Y 4ZbOVY bA9M 0fU2a2 YRDVTS 9vDi z+miH x48 ek1Q0J6N
IDPBQ7J dK23o K8Rz0 98/ 37// UCrhV1Dd 06PoqCmp ri6IWL 8+Pj 4+NTWn MD4iE7J 3eIww aLsojc
SG5NC aWbWQK V13fv IFdV3mRO h3r Z4Lnn r4oLrp wSm Epl1D5S uh0JDYkN QizzT19 CtqCnN ycnbsi
D9+H HnIhVVnq wqPRFPHP SGqrrqKA 8GEZr ANDh agGf +LhbOIJ gae3 /1kv HatnVF InJEZERJ n7Nn6Q3
//RSgS a49 5+I rs7xju8/ 2HMFp9 v0JR/c 0335w 9fvzs2 cLL 3d13 yWt XuqtLF hFHd/nqL jOOYL
aHVm jalmyb NTQ 3uNT+pL 1dbBzVA vCDkfm dCpG vE+Rp+w 5QJvsHg/ YxQrv Yr+hv+ ubsN2 ep4k
HFfxT3F dhQ1tQsM rDt

tGs QN7 9XZD LTiFlD k4js jT08G DKm 2RHGxFK+ pe4M iIwAtVSG 0fwuIo z26io EdvXuXT Ra79P/K1
rIUgNo lRT aGfQWt uGzN 2XzQ+LU YDH Mz9hA e3t jkK6Ltl H4NSM2w q8ZOS71 9Zd Qo8 goN OYYmxb
DaEODI/ BvMuvI2U NziDPQA u3dzQjCA pr6s EI6J +D6T0ps X3xG +OENn53t TU3tpN YOIKp qS19u
dyg7Mui 3XebqO3t odobQ4hD a2i2e S1HwJ hbzVqz0E VtLoYi etHF0 Qn4i bCQAAAn rSURBVP jh5Q1
Fez urLl WuPnuUz Nch OzlIo6XZ yp4Hs4d mbxD Nw8zMz H6LuzuK UKCrlZWY J4Z iq6d5f 6PRZGusS
MoVUWh lUazV ayHpm qrDo82D FNgQXpTj yT7mzT2a nYe9vY f7gmU vvOaX GJmYmebn 57QYj ZVDh
7CZ3G 41orsRr cW65n Vhs0Kz9 HHm4 aOHjx 5R9mO QWi dFb Itl 2dZzjm ZkFmJv Fue+z HjZxcxT
mSeO7d17 LPM10ccy yRoste 08h S5aln P/s E++ph qcIIJGMN UdiomW2 0Pg50fMG howNo i22s jMA6
HFeRgvG GGkUpq5 Fx7+m GdLlUp APbRO06w sa/bxbP kA8IvK7w wyba i4whxI nyJ mD01kGM 3OzAhp
pF1 crB2R q5EE389 KRGU CZLBCb2 dkvumz 2se 0DVf4 QpF I4L srt7g42 BH9 hi2IYP bQnAyi HbRbbWc
W6IHE FmBEsBbZ ANiF/C3 Zdtni ID2x kZ3De gla7F HvecbKC XpDb5k4e 3aT dU5cA 2QxM R4xHmax
gWbI8 VrLKWP VxuSPADH ylm QvmY8oyC e2SDf Goop/ gHtlU Dq7aFLjQ AomgG 40WExMQ AZCizNDk
16IkQN rbz hJWsIqmR CeAXXjQ EOO1X bJIf RRZJMib x+v2 UbjIhO5O mA1 aohs dUA M02 IzEJodns
/NjLSOAo wCVj Jn0U tPJSnkT yTbK+O Rpjt ktjySBHB ahT YuN MIMiUx NRrWY g5hNh WZn1KVVG
lMBClz9/ ijY9U S0fM tiMUluz EZ8ZLGl4 +yjG REhg QGqh vQSMWK 0g6v tYu JWY7QQ uiKOfTa IVaYfEP
UpHq+SH QDg81WB

QIDT eDypd NbRQgi7 2NiA WPR/ANZ GmjDm4MH VHsg8 YrRYIk/ vGJ7MU 4l+ LU/SxzLm i/Dwcej
TTTbO 7LF9Ruz q2BjEQ 1kQarQhw dkhk7J 6NR Wa6qJ 1/GHFka qmfnJcra uLkuDco IVk BMZ kxAYe
PBinsi EH0aCjhh kVwBmV6 Xb3yus5+ 6ruk uNvwXO Etv ZkbExs YCAaYSo2 JLKA1Yw+ xsV xzul1
9e7 l48fP j5+ sji OdGz Qiw97 Ow8Muk KLKyMC PtLhofYz jNO ijX b380SeKc YL1 DYvA3KD h74gtxxV
9SDEP hKwNi c2IoZm ee44ie4 5joLt3u6 +eP39 tXGQ9l 7zC/e DcoK0 ljtLljl uK1j qstV+bkW
EXw/K6j DYY 7nLnlS vjIWs6e 3zN jtRJnAMz LUuHR lz6A FsjBxBE Bi1FISi VAoqh 3C47 I3IKTdF
Skr MjNTV1EZ wbNC lBu 4n3UnAo mWtunIH HGS25W LO6CYDo n4z 4QSr d5gpNqv pqa9y SiJAQ O8aCxMU
ZE0XF+c UVDW 0DT8CqLS mprh8 bjbdxj tCk BKdLVf a+Ns TObnWMm gxYA BHABSGW /sHpmn oS3bM10q
MTk iNez9eTY /VHxym0l by5Qp NaAE5K1K uWwJLDO am2ILEE 8I3 0Sw z3i /TGR xdB9AB5/ nkN Bk6gE
Cbjx svT+ 5crZz/ CaNuEc4Y mlTriz lP+shHG QuPNjNDN h0b7CC HVXi2Ta5 9bmZ7s kxCe 4MPTR7t
URYn N1HTu 0Fi pIAKApUh CTt6G/90 n2gf R8Xj5 qj0ccpN 0nE3u7 8gH tXoi 7b5UOAMa OekUy0Z
b2yeXeDh DHrAEiC kvykQFZF mbH6VXZ k6xJS/6 70Abb/Px FsFiMl3u ogrpLC uaXUh 9ueUgN rH3v
EKj ZOf tSObxUf SC8IIt SdKxwV /Hf1H0 FMa npjqB+Y YmjYawjw SA7 OKQw RZdZB3 fUt+AUmK bf2j41B
+S5POT/P 0tRvDE qK+RZDc ebc Bx/ qFJoT ee7 CvoLYrp oFIfrSk+ OXWxY B6iS XmiMxVL QVJ dcZDIWw
odDW zGQVJz BfMRTWqF o0082VGD r1mfDa GFw7D 5iKavn zrtCJrZ tDZ5zFM0 oI9Wjd HE8x1 NBAwYk
h6kk SI4v9 GiI fA0X 6sfpc57 NCGK7EI9 uQYyR dnz HA0C7oI Xthib G0A rSE21 mp9o XpAnDheB
0GULtix blmQA rQR5kb x5iCYWQ RDkC7ju 7gvctyw zNpi0S03 1nodSWw wFu0jyK NfY3d 14mbuxp
8HNwQhtH koN LEV9 P0o godn bL3MnDG eGXp +PCv k7QDb u3rJg 2bIF7sb2 7ls M6iN5O2 ceWkg/sG
yLMWHvj si2GJu57 2ZLTXPWw O0P UuG8QxM tW2bsbm 9mb2/ sHm tmtnYMNG Qi55 2jtUKwz N3ew87O
w8wsEKF 5ZB g3G Eyaf +A179 xjyA1BXH EBHkZ2gb F2ZiEZZ gcMo1nPN zRX7hYP qmgBF xlmmBl5
ZHgYXN up9RFD7/ mFJuK626 2OiYm LCcRozxn ZHXj OIFq+FXS dX1F 2BB ppHgF UKRR Sy4xAM7 M33zQ6Y
PBse +uV8w vNGri7B 1LrOj Gr7T xi0WB 786ShJeI OMbSVzi8 0MX JB6 BUrhG YXiMQWmB

Fnp KeSXY 5wW nec zwa aYAEjN FyLgTQyF vG9GaC rkg0mQC ydZ2g +wNg+8GC cWmwBB wNWr44 5GKBVRtO
QAu E0k80 CWhiX tWslALE dRGwBsR ksuZVtg AAK pfMODRL 2gexqb LvV NFtsiN Fakrx3 8sB aI85
zKXDay 0ZmAY1D2 LHRArB KIrb A2IwQMyM jo7V mRgF vnoya/m Kf2UAzo iY1NhuSW 0xsb ODJDA
87M3 szj 4Mn3+T8 KtCQLT Gyi8mIi UVz3M mTsbEZ J0+ uJmaAbF bQVmujUb bEIyYj0 MMjMCMj4
8ABM8 JB+it BoyYBM+S XhNjbr7U nCL6T9 NeD FodkZmdG fWc2Z1q XC+d4r NFs BzNCjIwc ZvLGM4
/GJX T2m TLtT SPOzN545 tGeIrY EBq g3m r75ZoA aTTr f0Y4u cM8 4GEP7I bEeKMYO zPCg 0NCtg+
Y3Wij hcTL QLi7 O7rkMIyO 7k6SZW YZ9h lHcgYw Qrg DObzS +w4GQg Oc4Jg5 d5A HsE Bcbb9l CHiAcjA4
Eg0X zGg3y/N eGdFW60 LWC HR0t5 C4Ai siKp FwH 4DTPx5r Pcj 5VL tJe39 PU1N5U 1dTTdOY MPh8O
BM9 3M4KPAk VcJZ cuIapvqs 5+VIh +HM4pyA TSXwEaJK uqLp39+J tvUlM

Pf/bZ x4f xf3vS AHf eo62 HfmR Tdu Hhw69sO 7wtdd+ Ow3 u2pW5bn 3imnAia7 2huPDIzM i05Of
mZ8O zE7Pid1m mZpzK t9t4h i8B 8R7 P1IfPT8 0uP1aRR R9618 IrR4/cmF WQd9Jrn aEL1lyE lBVN
JHqo +N6qMD OPNd 6mZit VHkFMH wzVQ1ZAm Lsd4m+e /hVSV CEZR 6bkUUEf WcYCY 5yad92 i20BLrYG
UwA EEVK QAsBi LoM /O3nZW lQ1v8vc wQ8qK9 xJAn9JLO Tpudtez NK12d V2zevE 46m 23m 0f4snaP2
K0b7/yze jdoGj +TtAA AAAElFT kSuQmC C

Re:Bukkirani yoroshiku! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9819466)

planning != doing (4, Insightful)

chrispyman (710460) | more than 10 years ago | (#9819366)

While it's nice to know that they're planning on doing something that will take away a few more headaches, whose to say that this will ever get out the door and to the consumers?

Re:planning != doing (4, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9819377)

This is exactly why I support AMD instead of Intel on all of my purchases. Atleast AMD has a good idea of what they are going to be doing a few years from now. It seems like Intel doesn't and they change their minds too much, against the wishes of their customers.

Right. (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9819431)

Hammer will be released next year!
(year passes) Hammer will be released next year!
(year passes) Hammer will be released next year!

Re:Right. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9819847)

RIMMs are the future, we are totally dedicated to Rambus technology, we will never release anything but Rambus memory interconect chipsets, DDR is cack anyway.
(year passes) Rambus who? Look at this shiny DDR memory controller!

Re:planning != doing (2, Insightful)

eofpi (743493) | more than 10 years ago | (#9819933)

If you mean something along the lines of this, you're right:

AMD: We're still going to be trying to get more than 20% market share.
Intel: Um...trying to get further into the server market, and keeping ahead of AMD?
Win: AMD.

But if you mean in terms of sticking to their own previously announced plans for the next year, no. AMD's been playing the socket shuffle for a couple years now with sockets 754, 940, and 939. They've also decided to introduce 32-bit-only bargain CPUs (codenamed Sempron), after announcing that all their chips after the AthlonXP/MP would use x86-64. All that Intel's done in the same period is drop the intended successor to Prescott (called Tejas), and switch their desktop roadmaps to the Pentium M chips.
Win: Intel.

In an industry like this, it's not exactly easy to make predictions more than a couple years in advance and expect them to be entirely accurate.

Re:planning != doing (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9819950)

Ya.. its not like Intel has changed their support plans for Rambus Technology.

Re:planning != doing (1)

Glock27 (446276) | more than 10 years ago | (#9820625)

Win: Intel.

If you consider having less performance for most apps, no 64 bit x86 yet, and higher power consumption "winning". I don't. Intel's rush to copy everything AMD has done over the last couple of years shows where things really are.

The socket shuffle is no big deal, since by the time you want to upgrade your CPU you most likely will want a new motherboard too for new memory or other technologies. Motherboards aren't all that expensive regardless...

Re:planning != doing (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9820831)

Intel has always known where they are going a few years from today. It wasn't so long ago that they really did, and they drug along the rest of the industry. Now the industry isn't playing by Intel's rules and the market is dragging them along. Intel makes plans, its just that they are often in the best interest of Intel and tend to ignore what the market will actually want, and when the market doesn't play by your rules you end up making last minute plans to keep up.

Re:planning != doing (1)

ToLu the Happy Furby (63586) | more than 10 years ago | (#9820930)

Atleast AMD has a good idea of what they are going to be doing a few years from now.

Really? Can you point me towards those official public AMD roadmaps detailing their platform infrastructure in 2007?

Give me a break.

A polite way of keeping Itanium (5, Insightful)

Linus Sixpack (709619) | more than 10 years ago | (#9819372)

I imagine Intel wants a polite way to keep the Itanium on the books for very special applications and to save face. Zeon will, at least in the near future, be the processor of choice and a common socket will keep it from eclipsing the Itanic.

There might even be a chance that the market will change enough to want the Itanic, but not if they have to maintain specialized hardware for a currently very niche market.

LS

Re:A polite way of keeping Itanium (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9819418)

Disagree -- this helps Itanium much more than it helps Xeon.

Most current Itanium use is for larger systems, which is already entirely specialized hardware. Common mobos allow Itanium tomove "down market" into small servers and workstations by opening the whole range of mainstream chipsets at no additional cost.

I'm assuming these systems will use Intel's new platform-independant firmware.

Itanium is an "Edsel" (1)

Nick Driver (238034) | more than 10 years ago | (#9820832)

Nobody uses it, nobody wants it, few people have ever even seen one. The industry desire to support it just ain't there. It is gonna die. I know a lot of folks who still run OpenVMS systems on the dead Alpha platform, who are scrambling to replace these long running. stable and reliable VMS systems with completely something else.

There exists a perception is that HP is trying to artificially create some use for the Itanium to justify all the work they invested in it with Intel, by making it the next generation OpenVMS platform.

None.... nada, zip, zilch, of the VMS folks I know are interested in even thinking of going there. They'd all rather let their trusty old VMS finish dying the rest of its death and they'll change to something they think to stand a better chance of future support... Like MS Windows systems on the low-end for most users, RS6000/AIX on the high end, and an extreme minority of this group is looking towards Linux and open source solutions.

I've been around this industry for a long time and have yet to lay my hands on, or even personnally see an Itanium box firsthand. The cold hard fact is that few people even care that it exists. Itanium == boondoggle.

Re:A polite way of keeping Itanium (5, Insightful)

Jason Earl (1894) | more than 10 years ago | (#9819440)

Exactly. This is all about making it easier for Intel to sell Itanium servers. Intel doesn't want to go through the expense of designing and QAing separate Itanium motherboards for the five or six people that actually want Itanium. If the Xeon and Itanium share the same motherboard then OEMs can stock one motherboard and "upgrade" customers to Itanium if that's what they want.

If AMD wasn't serious competition with their AMD64 chips then Intel wouldn't even release 64 bit Xeons, but as things stand they don't have much of a choice.

Sieg Zeon! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9819454)

(Intel's processor is "Xeon". "Zeon" is something else entirely.)

Re:Sieg Zeon! (1)

meringuoid (568297) | more than 10 years ago | (#9819864)

Intel's processor is "Xeon". "Zeon" is something else entirely.

The most powerful explosive ever devised. IIRC, zeon missiles were more powerful than even antimatter missiles.

Of course by that stage of the game I was using phasers and mauler devices backed by the cumulative effects of every targetting computer there was, and generally battles were over before any missiles would have reached their targets :-)

Re:Sieg Zeon! - OT (1)

MonMotha (514624) | more than 10 years ago | (#9819925)

Holy Shit! Someone else who's actually played Master of Orion? That can't be!

Just don't attack my planet with 1000 missle bases armed with scatter pack Xs, or I may have to send my doom star armed with multiple hundreds of heavy plasma cannons, and maybe a stellar converter or two, to blow you to bits (and yes, I'm aware I just mixed MOO with MOO II).

Re:Sieg Zeon! - OT (1)

meringuoid (568297) | more than 10 years ago | (#9820643)

I always thought the stellar converter was overrated. After a couple of tech levels of miniaturisation, the Mauler Device gave you more firepower for a given cost. And having an equivalent bank of little blasters rather than one Big Momma cannon gives you versatility, too: I can take out ten cruisers or one dreadnought with my bank of Maulers; your Stellar Converter will nail the dreadnought just as well, but while it's recharging those other nine cruisers are going to be causing some trouble.

To my mind, the ultimate weapon in MOO2 was probably the phasor. With sufficient tech (OK, with really uber, 'I already own the galaxy but I'm researching Hyper-Advanced Physics XXVIII to see if I can beat the Antaran Home Fleet with a Destroyer' tech), it miniaturised down to a base size and cost of 1, and got just about every mod. Picking the shield piercing modification in conjunction with the (armour piercing) Achilles Targeting Unit, adding autofire and compensating for the reduced accuracy with battle computers and rangemaster units and whatnot, you end up with a truly magnificent weapon. Not for use against Antarans, though - they use Damper Fields not shields, and xentronium is immune to Achilles' armour piercing effect, so your best bet there is probably to go for brute damage using maulers.

Re:A polite way of keeping Itanium (1)

Scud (1607) | more than 10 years ago | (#9819455)

That's the way I read it, Itanic is a lame duck and Intel is simply trying to save as much face as possible.

John

Re:A polite way of keeping Itanium (5, Insightful)

sirsnork (530512) | more than 10 years ago | (#9819554)

Both Xeon and Itanium suffer the same woes, this gives them a good chance to correct both at the same time, although it will take a massive engineering effort on their part.

Intel are going to have to drop their shared bus architecture and move to a point to point system like AMD or memory performance will suffer greatly, otherwise you can only run your memory at your FSB speed and adding more procs just means they all get less mem bandwidth. This is going to become more pronounced with the introduction of Dual Core CPU's. Also since Xeons are build on the core of the desktop CPU's they will also have to change to follow suit (assuming Intel are going to move to a P2P architecture). At that time one would assume we would be talking about the P5 and one would also have to assume Intel would move the memory controllers onto the CPU's like AMD have.

That is quite a lot of work for Intel to do when they are also talking about dual cores. It's a lot of tech to get right all at the same time, especially given the delays involved with the Nocona launch and the associated motherboards. Itwould give them some rather nice options though, rather than using Hypertransport they could use PCI-E to join CPU's and have controllers on the CPU like the Opterons. Also because the CPU's are joined with a serial bus you can move them onto riser cards and make the most of the real estate in the chassis meaning you should be able to pack more CPU's in a smaller space.

The thing here though is that at some level the CPU's need to talk the same language, at least for initialisation at boot, although we are presuambly talking about 2 completly new cores so ever that is within the realm of possibility.

Re:A polite way of keeping Itanium (2, Insightful)

FireFury03 (653718) | more than 10 years ago | (#9819691)

The thing here though is that at some level the CPU's need to talk the same language, at least for initialisation at boot, although we are presuambly talking about 2 completly new cores so ever that is within the realm of possibility.

Whats stopping them putting 2 BIOSes onto the motherboard and then just switching between them depending which CPU you have in the box?

Re:A polite way of keeping Itanium (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9819772)

Whats stopping them putting 2 BIOSes onto the motherboard and then just switching between them depending which CPU you have in the box?

Intel's incompetence?

Re:A polite way of keeping Itanium (1)

sirsnork (530512) | more than 10 years ago | (#9819891)

Nothing's stopping them, but it seems like a lot of work when they are going to have to redesign the cores anyway

Re:A polite way of keeping Itanium (1)

ElvenMonkey (789317) | more than 10 years ago | (#9820236)

That is quite a lot of work for Intel to do when they are also talking about dual cores. It's a lot of tech to get right all at the same time, especially given the delays involved with the Nocona launch and the associated motherboards. Itwould give them some rather nice options though, rather than using Hypertransport they could use PCI-E to join CPU's and have controllers on the CPU like the Opterons. Also because the CPU's are joined with a serial bus you can move them onto riser cards and make the most of the real estate in the chassis meaning you should be able to pack more CPU's in a smaller space.

More CPUs in a smaller space? Sheesh... P4s are toasty enough as it is, and can take quite some noisy fans to cool 'em, but shoving more in the same space? Ikes. I wouldn't want to be sharing the same room with one of those.

From a system perspective surely you'd almost have to have memory on those riser cards too, or you'd just be reducing the effective operating memory per processor, presenting yet another bottleneck to the overall system performance. You'd almost be better off with a blade server

missing poll option! (4, Funny)

J_Omega (709711) | more than 10 years ago | (#9819374)

Feeling the heat from the competition, cutting losses, or just friendly customer service?


d) all of the above.

Why bother... (0, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9819379)

The Itanium is crap isn't it?

I choose AMD and VIA mini/nano-ITX whenever possible, voting with $.

And my vote is to try and support VIA's innovation whenever possible, they are the only ones with the guts to break with the safe economics of the current form factors.

Re:Why bother... (1)

NerveGas (168686) | more than 10 years ago | (#9819575)


The Itanium sucks for a lot of things, but when it comes to floating-point work, they're not half-bad - in fact, they are the tops of the currently published SpecFP scores.

Think of them like an Alpha: Very expensive, very fast at FP work, not so great at Integer work.

steve

Re:Why bother... (4, Insightful)

dago (25724) | more than 10 years ago | (#9819680)

no, even for that, IBM Power5 CPU got better SpecFP score.

And when you compare with all the factors, it doesn't mind if they're faster than opteron if they cost 4x the price and takes 2x the power (and generate 2x the heat).

Re:Why bother... (0, Flamebait)

Graelin (309958) | more than 10 years ago | (#9819704)

The Itanium is crap isn't it?

Spoken like a true sheep. Why don't you look it up yourself instead of letting the /. crowd feed you BS.

I choose AMD and VIA mini/nano-ITX whenever possible, voting with $.

Further proof you have no idea what this is about... Intel does not want YOU to buy an Itanium. Get real - you couldn't afford it even if you wanted to.

They want the Fortune 100 companies that need machines with 128+ processors for manhandling multi-gig datasets in seconds to buy them.

They could really give a shit about you. Your dollars, in this case, don't prove anything.

Re:Why bother... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9819754)

I can't afford a space ship.

That makes space exploration crap.

Whee the logic!

Actually.... (3, Insightful)

realxmp (518717) | more than 10 years ago | (#9819895)

I'm sorry but saying Itanium is crap is just flamebait unless you present a decent argument. The Itanium isn't as crap as most people make out, sure it has it's flaws but that's mainly because it was overdesigned for the future. The later generations of Itanium have much improved.

If you want to support innovation remember it was a fairly gutsy thing to do dropping the legacy x86 hardware support from it. The cost performance-wise of maintaining support has impacted on every processor intel's built since early Pentiums.

All I have to say is this... (-1, Offtopic)

TheMadPenguin (662390) | more than 10 years ago | (#9819389)

It's about fsking time!

Re:All I have to say is this... (3, Interesting)

CoolVibe (11466) | more than 10 years ago | (#9819410)

You said it bub. I for one grow tired of every cpu revision intel does because they shange the sockets everytime. p1->p2: new socket. p2->p3: well, there was a slot-1 p3, but again, there was a new socket. p3-p4: new socket. And almost every upgrade across cpu revisions requires the purchase of a new mainboard. Grah.

Glad to see that Intel is finally waking up and smelling the coffee.

Re:All I have to say is this... (1)

TheMadPenguin (662390) | more than 10 years ago | (#9819458)

My point exactly! I mean, we all know why they do that ;) (hint: $$$$$) but seriously it's annoying. By the way.. why was my post modded as offtopic?? I believe it's very ON topic! Mod me up or die goshdarnitall!

Re:All I have to say is this... (1)

Everlasting God (457993) | more than 10 years ago | (#9819507)

Yup, I sure wish P3s had stuck with good old socket 7. Nothing better than SIMMs.

Re:All I have to say is this... (2, Interesting)

bozoman42 (564217) | more than 10 years ago | (#9819652)

Oh come on. If your statement were fully accurate they'd be changing sockets every speed step. Core revisions are bound to either require different bus interfaces or introduce cost reduction. (E.g., Socket 370 was significantly cheaper to manufacture than Slot 1.) Are you saying you'd like to run your P4 in an 8086 DIP package?

And as a post pointed out next to mine, newer mainboards typically have plenty of other nice features.

If you're complaining about how much it costs to upgrade each time -- then don't. Especially these days, you really don't need the fastest and latest. I'm still using a 64MiB Radeon 8500 and I still don't see any compelling need to upgrade. (Although in my favor, I really don't care for Doom 3.)

Re:All I have to say is this... (1)

lachlan76 (770870) | more than 10 years ago | (#9820390)

If you always keep them the same, eventually some dickhead will stick his new 1.5v processor into an old 5v/12v motherboard. You're gonna need a new motherboard anyway, unless your current one can do 10GHz.

It's about time... (5, Funny)

GFLPraxis (745118) | more than 10 years ago | (#9819403)

At the rate Intel is keeping pace, by the time they get a 64-bit processor out with a unified socket, we'll be running Athlon 128's and dual dual core PowerMac G6's (also 128-bit)...sigh...

Get with the pace, Intel, and get a consumer 64-bit processor out! That way we get your P4's for cheap :D

Re:It's about time... (1)

shaitand (626655) | more than 10 years ago | (#9819532)

"That way we get your P4's for cheap"

Why? you can get a superior athlon chip now ;)

Why would you WANT 128 bit? (2, Interesting)

Craig Ringer (302899) | more than 10 years ago | (#9819740)

Seriously - why would you want 128 bit addressing. Modern CPUs are already "128 bits" or more wide in many of the ways that count, such as SIMD registers and instructions. I'm not sure how many applications are working with data that would benefit from 128 bit wide integers and floats, but I'm going to make a guess at "not many."

The move to 64 bit addressing is being done mostly because we've run out of room on the 32 bit address space. I'm not dumb enough to say that we'll never run out of the 64 bit address space, but I think it's safe to say it'll take a fair darn while before we do. Remember that AMD's 64 bit CPUs only use 40 bit (or is it 48 bit?) physical addressing to provide support for terabytes of memory, so they've got quite a bit of headroom within the 64 bit address space.

Re:Why would you WANT 128 bit? (1)

Ianoo (711633) | more than 10 years ago | (#9819952)

Well, with 128-bit addressing you could address something like 2 billion cubic metres of carbon atoms individually. I guess we won't reach this any time soon, probably not for at least a few hundred years ;)

Virtual Address Space (1)

Detritus (11846) | more than 10 years ago | (#9819971)

There are many uses for a really large virtual address space. You can create common address spaces for large collections of computers and large computer networks. You can assign addresses to objects that are guaranteed to be globally unique. You can guarantee that an object's address will never be reused. You can memory map very large databases. You can move to a single-level unified address space for RAM and permanent storage.

Re:Why would you WANT 128 bit? (1)

mikael (484) | more than 10 years ago | (#9820288)

128-bit addressing would allow you to pass four IEEE 32-bit floating point values simultaneously (enough to support 4x4 matrix/vector calculations), RGBA processing. This would boost the performance of 3D modelling/animation/CAD/image-processing applications.

The argument against this is that such processing is better done on dedicated hardware such as a GPU, rather than on an input-processing CPU. But I'm sure developers would find a way of load-balancing between the different processors.

You can already do that (1)

Craig Ringer (302899) | more than 10 years ago | (#9820341)

To a fair extent you can already do that. The processor bus width is independent of the address space width, and the SIMD units in modern processors are used for this sort of job.

I find the arguments of another poster here about cluster-wide shared address spaces etc much more interesting, though. I'm sure the crazy folks behind Plan 9 would have fun with the idea of a single global memory address space...

Re:Why would you WANT 128 bit? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9820887)

Uh, you can do this right now in the x86 using SSE.

Re:Why would you WANT 128 bit? (1)

lachlan76 (770870) | more than 10 years ago | (#9820347)

I haven't done any benchmarks, but I would imagine that SSE instructions take considerably more cycles to complete than x86.

And the Athlon 64 has 40-bit physical addressing and 48-bit virtual addressing, IIRC.

And as for what applications could benefit from 128-bit registers, I would imagine that anything using RC5 would be speeded up (even though it is already extremely fast). There would be others too, but I haven't written any others that I know of.

In other news...... (-1, Offtopic)

i_hate_exnihilo (799826) | more than 10 years ago | (#9819413)

the GNAA plans a common socket for both black and white cocks. The goatse socket is slated for release in the fall.

Sounds like they're admitting defeat. (5, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9819437)

Something like this adds to the complexity of the system board. The odds are good that you'd only want to do this if the sales of one type of system were so poor, you'd prefer the increased complexity so you can gain increased economies of scale.

Eg: how does a system bootstrap itself from power on to the point where the OS is loaded? That's the job of the code in the BIOS (or OpenBoot, or equivalent). Do you believe that x86-32 BIOS code is going to work to get an Itanium CPU loading the OS? The only way you'll get a generic BIOS to work is if there's an opcode that will allow a jump to a given address in one CPU, whilst just incrementing the instruction pointer on the other.

Look at Athlon. The Athlon bus was designed so that you could, in theory, plug an Alpha into an Athlon board. How many boards were made available to do this? Zip (that I know of, anyway.)

Intel are desperate to increase sales of Itanic (typo deliberate ;) -- they're hoping that by doing this, the economies of scale will make Itanic more appealing. Sorry, Intel; I'd say that this is the beginning of the end. Your fortunes were built on backwards compatibility, and it looks like that's now the millstone around your neck, dragging Itanium down.

Uhhhhhh... (4, Informative)

Ayanami Rei (621112) | more than 10 years ago | (#9819549)

Dude, Intel's got it's own OpenFirmware like doohickey already for the Itanium, it's called EFI.

Anyway, it's really simple. The processors will assert different "core-type" lines, which will control which ROM is memory-mapped to the default EIP pointer at boot time. I mean, Intel processors already signal their allowed clocking speeds by pins right now. Hell, they're probably different in x86-32 and Itanium, so they could both "be active" all the time, jumping to the appropriate memory-mapped physical address (both of which would be mapped at power-on to their own ROMs) and there'd be no need for an option line.

multiple firmware architectures (2, Interesting)

whitis (310873) | more than 10 years ago | (#9820128)

The processors will assert different "core-type" lines, which will control which ROM is memory-mapped to the default EIP pointer at boot time.

Close. It would not make sense to have two or more ROM chips on the motherboard to support different architectures. So, what you do is take 1-3 lines from the processor or jumpers and connect them to the high order address lines on a larger capcity rom CHIP. 1 Line gives you two different architectures. 3 lines gives you 8 archs if you could ever get that many chip families in the same socket. Or take a chip about twice the capacity and use 4 select lines. Banks 0-8 of 16 would boot different processors and load microcode, chip specific code, and a java bytecode interpreter (not much in the BIOS needs to be very fast, except maybe the memory test). Then the whole top half of the ROM would be used for bytecode, with the 4 select lines being re-multiplexed as regular address lines once the firmware got to a certain point. Even better, a trivial change to the CPU cores could make them each start at different addresses in a jump table at the top of the ROM. Reserve the top 256 bytes as 16 different 16 byte locations. That should be more than enough for a jump instruction in any architecture, even with 64 bit opcodes with separate 64 bit addresses.

It really would be nice to have an industry standard processor bus which you could plug an intel, AMD, SPARC, or PowerPC chip into. It could be an interface with some optional pins. You could have a 128bit memory bus but only use half of it on some processors or motherboards. And you could have variable numbers of PCI-Express channels.

Failure to support different memory widths has been a traditional failing in PC motherboard designs. To keep it simple, consider the old 8 bit wide 30 pin SIMMS. Populating 5,6, or 7 of your 8 memory slots should have worked. In the case of 7, you would have had, say, 4MB of fast 32 bit memory, 2MB of medium speed 16 bit memory, and 1MB of slow 8 bit memory; you would use 4MB for code and the slower 3MB for cache or least recently used code pages (half way between ram and swap). I remember the 68020 family of processors was pretty good at handling this, there were lines the processor used to signal the requested width of the transfer and lines the external peripherals used to signal the actual width. These days with synchronous transfers the CPU would probably want to know the bus width of different memory banks in advance. Newer systems have similar issues with needing to install DIMMs in pairs to get full speed. It would be nice for people on limited budgets to be able to upgrade memory one bank at a time and the processor and motherboard at separate times. And do things like mix slow PC3200 RAM from your old motherboard and fast PC3200 RAM. Some minor OS improvements would be needed to allow the OS to recognize that not all memory is the same speed so slow memory shouldn't be used for speed critical pages. At some point, however, it is better to replace the whole CPU/memory/motherboard combination.

Re:Sounds like they're admitting defeat. (5, Insightful)

NerveGas (168686) | more than 10 years ago | (#9819550)

It's not admitting defeat, it's getting rid of something that hasn't made much sense.

The Xeon line has traditionally been both the more lucrative and the more "stable" line, on the idea that businesses wanted long-term stability. When you bought a Xeon motherboard, you knew that it would be compatible with some of the upcoming Xeons in FSB and slot, and with a VRM module, even for different voltages.

A very large side-effect is that the Xeon line was tied to slower FSB/memory rates, and a lot more expensive. In reality, most people don't upgrade their Xeon chips - they move to a new architecture (P2->P3->P4, etc.)

Looking at the P2/P3 Xeons, it was long after the shift to a 133MHz FSB when the Xeons played catch-up. And it's just now that the P4 Xeons are getting away from the 533MHz FSB.

So, they're taking their most expensive, most lucrative processers, and hindering the performance. While it worked while Intel was the 800-pound gorilla (and you had no other choice in 2-way, let alone 4-way machines), that's no longer the case. There's competition in the market - good competition. It was a real kick in the pants to shell out $5000 to $15,000 on Xeon systems that had a slower FSB than the $500 desktop counterparts!

So, now, they're going to have to do the sensible thing: Start giving actual performance in exchange for customer money. Rather than have the "high-end bus" and the "low-end" or "mid-range" bus, it makes a lot of sense to just have all of them use one bus design - theoretically, a fast bus.

The Athlon bus was designed so that you could, in theory, plug an Alpha into an Athlon board

I really don't think that was the idea. AMD was looking for a front-side bus design, and Intel's wasn't an option. The Alpha design was available for the right price, and so it was used.

Do you believe that x86-32 BIOS code is going to work to get an Itanium CPU

I believe that Intel has already stated that they want to make some radical changes to the way the BIOS works.

Sorry, Intel; I'd say that this is the beginning of the end.

Unless they're able to really shift direction, I'd agree.

steve

Re:Sounds like they're admitting defeat. (1)

hackstraw (262471) | more than 10 years ago | (#9820753)

I believe that Intel has already stated that they want to make some radical changes to the way the BIOS works.

They are ditching the BIOS in favor of EFI [intel.com] .

Reasonable, non-suprising, ends on silly note (2, Interesting)

OnanTheBarbarian (245959) | more than 10 years ago | (#9819460)

First, the lead-in on Slashdot is silly. Intel has been planning this for a while. Yes, it is good customer service. They're not "cutting their losses" and this move makes sense even if AMD were to fold up tomorrow.

It's just simply too expensive to develop two different motherboard sets when you could leverage the increasingly similar characteristics of high-end Xeon motherboards and Itanium motherboards.

Also silly is the end of the article suggesting that Itanium will take over the world any time in the reasonably distant future. This is a strawman will no doubt ignite a frenzy of Itanium hating from various people (yes, we've all heard it before, Itanium is dead, Linus hates it, etc.). Besides, it doesn't reflect Intel's current clearly stated strategy, which indicates that we'll have both architectures for a very long time.

None of the above (3, Informative)

aka-ed (459608) | more than 10 years ago | (#9819488)

Feeling the heat from the competition, cutting losses, or just friendly customer service?"

I'd say, gearing down to a commodotized market.

intel still wont get anything out of this (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9819491)

yea i still think intel sucks. if you ask me AMD will eventully beet out intel, AMD has got the 64 bit market allready and now that personal computers can run off 64 bit processors intel has got a some major competion. if they still cant get the 64 bit processors for home use then i think intel will loese a larg part of the market share

Re:intel still wont get anything out of this (3, Insightful)

NerveGas (168686) | more than 10 years ago | (#9819523)


I don't think that AMD will ever beat out Intel completely, but if they keep making the right moves, they will be able to force Intel to radically change how it does business.

Intel has traditionally enjoyed very, very healthy profit margins. AMD, on the other hand, has traditionally lost money - it's only been in the last quarter or two that they've even posted a profit. To bring a company from the times of the K6 and K6-2 to having an incredible offering like the Opteron, while having to be so cautious with money, shows that AMD can be resourceful, and compete even when it's an uphill battle.

Intel, on the other hand, has enough infrastructure, capital, partners, investment, and diversification that it will never be beat out entirely. However, as AMD starts to make more and more profits (by eating into Intel's most lucrative market!), they'll (theoretically) be able to step up the competition and give Intel an even stronger opponent. If they do that, Intel will have to start being much more frugal and resourceful.

Up until a few years ago, the AMD-Intel battle was pretty one-sided. Now, things are going to be a lot more fun to watch.

steve

It's still not much better than a stop-gap... (4, Interesting)

NerveGas (168686) | more than 10 years ago | (#9819504)


With Opterons coming in much less expensive than the Itaniums, moving to a common socket with the Xeons isn't going to help much.

On the other hand, with Opterons offering far better scalability and performance than Xeons, moving to a common socket with Itaniums isn't going to help out much.

Even on 2-way machines, Opterons show much better scalability than Xeons. As the number of CPUs increase, the Opteron architecture (when coupled with a supporting OS) allows it to shine more and more. With 8-way Opterons coming out fairly soon, Intel needs to come up with something fast - they're losing one of their most lucrative markets to AMD.

steve

Re:It's still not much better than a stop-gap... (2, Interesting)

Sique (173459) | more than 10 years ago | (#9820658)

But if I were Intel and I saw that other offerings scale better, and if I knew that the main problem is the shared CPU bus architecture and the limited memory bandwith, I would consider designing a new CPU bus.

And if I have two processor lines for multi processor systems, I would think about upgrading both CPU bus architectures, if both suffer the same problem. And then I would be thinking: Hey! I have to design a new bus system anyway, and I have two processor lines to serve, why not make this bus system able to serve both CPU types? Thus I only need one line of chipsets, I can offer upgrades by replacing the one processor line with the other, I am thus offering smooth migration paths for customers who might think about changing their hardware for better performance and thus could be looking to a different company, by allowing them to keep part of their hardware and just replace the processors.

After some consideration, the idea makes sense.

Great, what about the other one? (1, Interesting)

shaitand (626655) | more than 10 years ago | (#9819513)

When will we see the return of common sockets on the desktop and server for both intel and amd processors? I'm starting to get annoyed with having to pay attention.

The beginning of the end for Itanium (4, Interesting)

shizzle (686334) | more than 10 years ago | (#9819518)

I think this is a sign of Intel cutting its losses... this will certainly save money, but at the cost of being able to differentiate Itanium platforms from Xeon platforms. One of the real distinctions between a high-end platform and a run-of-the-mill machine is memory bandwidth; if both types of chips plug into the same socket, they're going to have access to the same bandwidth, and Itanium will lose one of its few remaining advantages over Xeon.

Intel would only do this if saving money was more important to them than giving people a credible reason to buy Itaniums instead of Xeons... and I do believe that's the situation at this point in time. Not a good sign for the future of Itanium.

It's that or no more motherboards (3, Insightful)

Animats (122034) | more than 10 years ago | (#9819572)

Sounds more like "If we don't do this, nobody will make Inanium motherboards". Now that Intel has cloned AMD's 64-bit architecture, I'm surprised they're still pushing the Inanium at all.

Actually, the real question is how much longer Microsoft will support the Itanium. Remember when NT supported MIPS, Alpha, PowerPC, and x86? Actually, Microsoft only supports the Itanium in a very limited way. The OS, and a few server side apps, run native. But that's it. The desktop apps all run in emulation, as far as I can find out.

Re:It's that or no more motherboards (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9820143)

Lots of high end vendors support itanic.
HP,Unisys,Hitachi,SGI,BULL etc

But they all make large systems with proprietary hardware. For those guys the 256 registers and 4 parallell pipelines really does matter.

AMD only has 16 puny registers, and just look at the 64bit benchmark and itanium eclipes AMD.

Re:It's that or no more motherboards (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9820282)

LOL, too bad they're not shifting much Itanium hardware (if any - Dell and IBM have both had quarters of zero Itanium sales).

As for 64-bit performance Power5 thumps Itanium and Opteron. Shit, even Power4 can go neck and neck with the current Itanium - where's the next generation Itanium again?

Itanium is dead. Anyone who argues otherwise is hoping that both IBM slips up and Intel pulls a rabbit out of its hat.

friendly customer service my ass (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9819577)

If it were up to intel, we would all be using 120W processors that don't do shit... Intel did this for 1 of 2 reasons.

1. resellers were getting extremely pissed
2. they could save engineering, production, maintenance costs.

In general businesses try to "segment" their market, and when you vertically own the market, it is in your best interest to "make" everything, including different socket types.

Fuck Intel, they are feeling the heat because the P4 is turning out to be a piece of shit and the Opteron is kicking ass and taking names.

Granted Opteron's marketshare is nowhere near that of Intel's because all the OEMs don't wanna piss Intel off, but the big boys (IBM, HPUX, SUN) are selling Opteron systems because they know there is money and value in it.

Re:friendly customer service my ass (2, Insightful)

NerveGas (168686) | more than 10 years ago | (#9819582)

In general businesses try to "segment" their market, and when you vertically own the market, it is in your best interest to "make" everything, including different socket types

The problem has been that in the high-dollar area (Xeons), they've been sticking the consumer with slower busses than the desktop line. Until recently, when there was no other option in the price range, people just sucked it up and dealt with it. Now that there is good competition, that's going to have to change. This is probably a way for them to get some fast busses into their high-dollar (Xeon and Itanium) lines without it looking like they could have done it all along.

steve

Re:friendly customer service my ass (1)

mczak (575986) | more than 10 years ago | (#9820383)

You make that sound like intel uses slower busses on Xeon setups just to fool their customers. I don't think that's the case at all. If you have only one cpu, it is much easier to increase the bus frequency, as it only needs to connect 2 chips (northbridge & cpu), trace length is quite short. But with 2 cpus (Xeon DP), you now have 3 chips to connect to the same bus. Not only are the traces going to be longer, but there is also more load on the bus. For quad setups, it's even a lot worse - 5 chips to connect, and you really start getting routing problems.
I believe this is the reason that current P4 use FSB800 (soon FSB1066), current Xeon DP use mostly FSB533 (the FSB800 Xeon DP (Nocona) has already been paper-launched), and Xeon MP are stuck with FSB400. Of course it is very counterproductive, as the available bus bandwidth per cpu really goes down the toilet (a Xeon MP in a quad setup has only 1/8 of the bandwidth available on average than a single P4!).

Interesting approach.... (4, Insightful)

carlmenezes (204187) | more than 10 years ago | (#9819615)

AMD has lots of processors that do both 32-bit and 64-bit. Problem is the number of different sockets out there. This means you need to change your motherboard everytime you switch from one socket to another - big expense and something that makes u think a lot about which socket u want.

Intel says...use our 64-bit procs and you won't need to change the socket. This is a marketing thing. I don't think there will be much of a performance difference if the socket is changed. But it makes things more convenient for the customer.

Now, if AMD had done this...they would have grabbed market share. It might still not be too late to unify the sockets...but then it looks like it will be more difficult for AMD given the differences in the processors available across their entire range.

Re:Interesting approach.... (1)

jmorris42 (1458) | more than 10 years ago | (#9819708)

> Now, if AMD had done this...they would have grabbed market share. It
> might still not be too late to unify the sockets...but then it looks
> like it will be more difficult for AMD given the differences in the
> processors available across their entire range.

AMD can't do that. They need the different sockets for now.

The Socket 754 is for the Athlon64. It is designed for folks like myself who want to get an early jump on x86_64 but can't justify the major coin for the socket 940 stuff. Since the socket 754 is using a 32bit memory bus it means it can't compete with the real 64bit kit and undermine the margins on the high end stuff, and AMD really needs to put some profits in the bank. But at the same time the Athlon64 gets them lots more machines in the field and they also need that.

Re:Interesting approach.... (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9819882)

Since the socket 754 is using a 32bit memory bus...

Bla... S754 uses a 64-bit memory bus. S940 (Opteron) and S939 uses a dual-channel 64-bit bus, in effect a 128-bit bus.

Re:Interesting approach.... (0)

jmorris42 (1458) | more than 10 years ago | (#9820008)

> Bla... S754 uses a 64-bit memory bus.

If that is so, find me a motherboard with a max memory limit above 3GB.

Re:Interesting approach.... (4, Interesting)

Tim C (15259) | more than 10 years ago | (#9819805)

This means you need to change your motherboard everytime you switch from one socket to another - big expense and something that makes u think a lot about which socket u want.

Well, I've had a PC for about 8 years now, and have upgraded a number of times. I don't recall ever keeping the same motherboard when buying a new processor.

True, I imagine that if you buy them regularly, then you may well "reuse" a motherboard once or twice. But personally, by the time I need/can afford to upgrade, a new motherboard is a requirement if I want to obtain a decent performance increase. My old one simply won't support the newer chips.

So, for people who do go to the trouble and expense of incremental upgrades, yes, I can see that not having to buy a new motherboard may be a factor. But I think probably the majority of people leave it long enough between upgrades that keeping the same one simply isn't an option. YM, of course, MV.

Re:Interesting approach.... (1)

KZigurs (638781) | more than 10 years ago | (#9819814)

They already are unifying - see socket 939

Inventory problems (1)

Halcyon-X (217968) | more than 10 years ago | (#9819617)

the reseller has to have an inventory of both boxes on hand.

No they don't. But now they will.

Common Sockets for differnt architectures? (2, Interesting)

remin8 (791979) | more than 10 years ago | (#9819638)

Not that slaping together server hardware is that dificult (and I really don't know much about hardware design) but, wouldn't you want boards that are optimized for use with either Xeon OR Itanium? Wouldn't creating compatability on this hardware reduce its performance? Or is this a non-issue?

Re:Common Sockets for differnt architectures? (4, Insightful)

Graelin (309958) | more than 10 years ago | (#9819741)

Not that slaping together server hardware is that dificult

It's not as easy as you might think. Maybe the dual proc you set up for the small biz you work for was simple, and it is, but that really doesn't qualify as a server anywhere near the league of an Itanium. Even high-end Dell machines go through a lot of QA to ensure the hardware and it's drivers play nice together. When you're talking about a $100,000+ machine with major support contracts and liabliity concerns - "slaping together server hardware" really isn't.

wouldn't you want boards that are optimized for use with either Xeon OR Itanium?

In this order, I want:
1) Stability
2) Performance

I don't care if the board is optimized for the Apple II. If it runs Itanium with equal or higher stability and equal or higher performance of the next best thing - I'll buy it.

Wouldn't creating compatability on this hardware reduce its performance? Or is this a non-issue?

Well, it's too soon to tell since nobody has one of these boards. And this is only a "plan" so it still may never happen. But I suspect the answer is "not necessarily."

If you can do tricks like this [slashdot.org] , then I would think there is hope you could create a board like this and not suffer any performance problems. (But I am not a chip designer so who the hell am I?)

How much does that thing cost these days? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9819661)

What's an Itanium go for?

Last I checked, it was tens of thousands of dollars per chip, am I right?

Xeon, Itanium? (4, Funny)

circletimessquare (444983) | more than 10 years ago | (#9819828)

Aren't those elements with one letter missing?

Xenon, Titanium... hmmm...

What next, the Intel Trontium? the Intel Kryton?

Rypton... (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9819959)

which will have been "ryptoff" AMD's processor...

Xeon ~ P4 + IA-64 = danger (3, Insightful)

zepi (784314) | more than 10 years ago | (#9820010)

P4 and Xeons are pretty much same stuff, right... Both are x86 compatible, both (in theory, not yet) run X86-64 extensions. Itanium is something very different, it runs IA64 instuctions which are very incompatible with x86-64.

For me this looks like the last attempt to screw things up for AMD and x86-64 architecture in high-end workstations / servers.

Let's assume that you are a pretty big boss in a normal company. Your company has decided to upgrade their High-End computers. You have basically two options:

Either you recommend 100% Intel Hardware that runs current 32-bit stuff fine and is ready to be upgraded or is even compatible with IA-64 stuff. x86-64 compliance is hardly mentioned in specs. If there even is such compatibility. 64-bit thing is important for future. Not probably yet, but in future. (Xeon/Itanium mixed platform)

or

"50% Intel compatible" AMD platform which runs current 32-bit stuff very well, but the x86-64 instruction set is non-compatible with Intels High-End IA-64 infrastructure. So only partial Intel compatibility, sounds bad... Thats like 50% Intel incompatible... (A64 / Opteron platform)

You are really going to have hard time convincing yourself and your even bigger bosses, that Non-Intel compatibility is good for your business. Mainly because Intel compatibility has been THE most important thing for last 15 years or so...

Then Intel just starts it's advertising/lobbying campaings and hopes that this is enough to turn the tide for them...

ps. if there are typos just blame the damn internet-cafe's german kezboard... somebody has swapped mz Z and Y.

Re:Xeon ~ P4 + IA-64 = danger (1)

lachlan76 (770870) | more than 10 years ago | (#9820306)

P4 and Xeons are pretty much same stuff, right... Both are x86 compatible

A Xeon is a P4 with extra cache. P4EE is just a repackaged Xeon.

Re:Xeon ~ P4 + IA-64 = danger (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9820316)

You are really going to have hard time convincing yourself and your even bigger bosses, that Non-Intel compatibility is good for your business. Mainly because Intel compatibility has been THE most important thing for last 15 years or so... Then Intel just starts it's advertising/lobbying campaings and hopes that this is enough to turn the tide for them...

This theme is getting pretty annoying on /. The assumption always seems to be that PHB's are soooo stupid about the technology that they oversee that they are easily swayed by advertising/lobbying campaigns. Of course the Intels of this world keep playing to this theme, too, so it can't be entirely discounted.

Frankly, if companies are stupid enough to get locked into this approach and it really does halt the sinking of the Itanic, I will have lost another small piece of already dwindled faith in American business leadership!

I don't believe that's serious (2, Interesting)

Maljin Jolt (746064) | more than 10 years ago | (#9820023)

Long ago, upgrading cpu with cpu upgrade kit from 386 to 486 and 486 to pentiums was quite a possible deal to boost an old machine up.

In 1997 I bought an Intel(!) mobo with Slot1/celeron buggy cpu. As was advertised these days, I hoped I will buy much better cpu some 2-3 years later instead of whole machine, because in past 15 years, as a developer I was buing a new machine for personal desktop every 2 years.

Unfortunately, no such upgrade was actually available, all "new" Intel processors were either completely different slot/socket or incompatible timig (mobo too slow). Again, in 3 years, I was forced to buy a new machine instead with some new stupid socket, which becomes obsolete today.

So, I do not believe Intel upgrade cpu/compatible cpu propaganda anymore. My new machine is AMD Opteron.

Why not... (1)

tomstdenis (446163) | more than 10 years ago | (#9820124)

Get together with other tech manufacturer, agree on a 1000-pin model and stick with that? That way we can have more effective competition, less fractioning of technology [I mean, do I use a 729, 940 or 939 pin mobo for an "Athlon 64+ 3500?"]

Tom

Re:Why not... (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9820256)

That way we can have more effective competition

Yeah, good plan you retard. I'm sure the first thing companies want is MORE FUCKING COMPETITION.

Intel: stock performance suffers (1)

gelfling (6534) | more than 10 years ago | (#9820389)

Intel has been in news recently with one story after another about how they missed most of their product launches this year. Today in fact the CEO sent a memo to the entire company telling them in short that they're a bunch of losers who have to work harder or there will be hell to pay.

Maybe they really don't have a fucking clue at Intel and what they really don't need is yet another pointless product variation and instead they should focus on getting their stuff right.

Intel is starting to look like a goddamn cereal company that's making up shit just to get more shelf space.

Brute force (1)

FraggedSquid (737869) | more than 10 years ago | (#9820692)

With a hammer all sockets are common.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?