From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Aug 6 11:07:21 2009 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A0CB4106564A for ; Thu, 6 Aug 2009 11:07:21 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from erikt@midgard.homeip.net) Received: from ch-smtp02.sth.basefarm.net (ch-smtp02.sth.basefarm.net [80.76.149.213]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5961C8FC1D for ; Thu, 6 Aug 2009 11:07:21 +0000 (UTC) Received: from c83-255-48-78.bredband.comhem.se ([83.255.48.78]:60858 helo=falcon.midgard.homeip.net) by ch-smtp02.sth.basefarm.net with esmtp (Exim 4.68) (envelope-from ) id 1MZ0oV-0000tm-7b for freebsd-questions@freebsd.org; Thu, 06 Aug 2009 13:07:17 +0200 Received: (qmail 29892 invoked from network); 6 Aug 2009 13:07:12 +0200 Received: from owl.midgard.homeip.net (10.1.5.7) by falcon.midgard.homeip.net with ESMTP; 6 Aug 2009 13:07:12 +0200 Received: (qmail 5609 invoked by uid 1001); 6 Aug 2009 13:07:12 +0200 Date: Thu, 6 Aug 2009 13:07:12 +0200 From: Erik Trulsson To: Erich Dollansky Message-ID: <20090806110712.GA5475@owl.midgard.homeip.net> References: <200908051414.49468.david@vizion2000.net> <200908061631.04639.erich@apsara.com.sg> <4A7A9709.9070803@mapper.nl> <200908061718.10505.erich@apsara.com.sg> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200908061718.10505.erich@apsara.com.sg> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) X-Originating-IP: 83.255.48.78 X-Scan-Result: No virus found in message 1MZ0oV-0000tm-7b. X-Scan-Signature: ch-smtp02.sth.basefarm.net 1MZ0oV-0000tm-7b f5657a4be8bbdc04297e8fe509ffc55f Cc: Mark Stapper , freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: kernel designations terminology confusion -- amd64 used for into quad core X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 06 Aug 2009 11:07:21 -0000 On Thu, Aug 06, 2009 at 05:18:09PM +0800, Erich Dollansky wrote: > Hi, > > On 06 August 2009 pm 16:40:41 Mark Stapper wrote: > > Erich Dollansky wrote: > > > > > IA 64? Wans't this once - or still is - the term used for the > > > Itanium? > > > > The one that didn't stick... indeed. > > do they really sell machines with this CPU in numbers? Yes, but not very large numbers - especially not compared to x86 machines. According to some estimates quoted in the Wikipedia article on Itanium, Intel manufactures around 200,000 Itanium CPUs per year, which translates to a far smaller number of machines since most of them are multi-CPU systems. By far the largest seller of Itanium-based systems is HP (which also partnered with Intel in creating the IA64 architecture in the first place.) > > I have not seen one in the wild. Not surprising since the Itanium is mainly used in the kind of high-end server systems that us ordinary people rarely see and certainly can't afford to buy. -- Erik Trulsson ertr1013@student.uu.se