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>