AI
Tuesday, April 29, 2003 1:13:28 AM
Doug, Re: 2-5
2. Microsoft has no reason to invest in Opteron optimizations. That was the original subject for #2, was it not? It sounds like their support will be minimal, and highly leveraged off of the work they already did for Intel.
3. Itanium max power dissipation seems to follow the same observations you've seen for Opteron. 130W is used regardless of frequency, so presumably, the 900MHz version dissipates less. FWIW, AMD's wording on their datasheet makes it very clear that 84.7W is a max power "target". That means to me: "Design your systems to this level, and they will work great through future product upgrades." AMD has effectively "capped" their power level. However, it's still important to realize that it remains unclear how much power is dissipated at lower frequencies. I wouldn't presume it scales linearly with frequency.
4. We'll see.
5. Windows 2003 Server is missing the .NET framework for Itanium 2. This is unfortunate, but not a barrier for entry right now. Itanium's competitors will not be using .NET, and it's doubtful that Microsoft will get a 64-bit version for Opteron before Itanium.
As for Yamhill, or whatever Intel's 64-bit mainstream processor will be called, I don't see it as a danger to Itanium. It's the product that sells, not the "bittness". I still think Itanium architecture will perform head and shoulders above the competition in server oriented tasks.
2. Microsoft has no reason to invest in Opteron optimizations. That was the original subject for #2, was it not? It sounds like their support will be minimal, and highly leveraged off of the work they already did for Intel.
3. Itanium max power dissipation seems to follow the same observations you've seen for Opteron. 130W is used regardless of frequency, so presumably, the 900MHz version dissipates less. FWIW, AMD's wording on their datasheet makes it very clear that 84.7W is a max power "target". That means to me: "Design your systems to this level, and they will work great through future product upgrades." AMD has effectively "capped" their power level. However, it's still important to realize that it remains unclear how much power is dissipated at lower frequencies. I wouldn't presume it scales linearly with frequency.
4. We'll see.
5. Windows 2003 Server is missing the .NET framework for Itanium 2. This is unfortunate, but not a barrier for entry right now. Itanium's competitors will not be using .NET, and it's doubtful that Microsoft will get a 64-bit version for Opteron before Itanium.
As for Yamhill, or whatever Intel's 64-bit mainstream processor will be called, I don't see it as a danger to Itanium. It's the product that sells, not the "bittness". I still think Itanium architecture will perform head and shoulders above the competition in server oriented tasks.
