Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2005 18:18:56 -0700 From: "Chad Leigh -- Shire.Net LLC" <chad@shire.net> To: RW <list-freebsd-2004@morbius.sent.com> Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: EM64T supported? Message-ID: <0F1E68F2-D2C9-4E20-8B55-83786ED12AB4@shire.net> In-Reply-To: <200511180035.18168.list-freebsd-2004@morbius.sent.com> References: <20051117150323.U1019@ganymede.hub.org> <437CD68F.2030008@t-hosting.hu> <200511180035.18168.list-freebsd-2004@morbius.sent.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Nov 17, 2005, at 5:35 PM, RW wrote: > On Thursday 17 November 2005 19:14, Kövesdán Gábor wrote: >> EM64T is Intel's 64-bit processor architecture. It uses 64 bit >> registers >> so it gets around the 4GB limit. It is very similar to AMD64 >> architecture ... > > > IA-64 was Intel's 64-bit architecture. IA-64 is one of Intel's architectures. > EM64T is Intel's attempt to make AMD64 > compatible processors. EM64T is another of Intels 64bit architectures. Happens to be (mostly) compatible with AMD 64 bit but it is Intel's. Intel may have been inspired (read copied) AMDs, but AMD's is called something else. "is" as in "belongs to", not as in "developed by". AMD calls theirs something different and I believe the opcode mnemonics are different. Chad > > Credit where credit's due. --- Chad Leigh -- Shire.Net LLC Your Web App and Email hosting provider chad@shire.net
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?0F1E68F2-D2C9-4E20-8B55-83786ED12AB4>