Replies to post #17078 on Advanced Micro Devices Inc (AMD)

[Petz]

re:<Just like your interpretation of that interview with the SUN guy, you´re just WAY off here.>

Let's look at that interview one more time, some of this was on the SI thread:
___________________________________________________________________
Q: So Intel put a 64-bit extension into Prescott?
A: Yeah.

Q: With 64-bit memory addressing?
A: With their 64-bit architecture, they will allow programs to have 64-bit addressability. I suspect there also will be 64-bit registers and 64-bit function units. But basically it's an Opteron-type of compatible design.
___________________________________________________________________

The answer to the second question is referring to TWO DIFFERENT THINGS.

"their 64-bit architecture" is NOT the same thing as "a 64-bit extension."

"their" -- implies that he is talking about something that is uniquely Intel, and something that already exists, and that something is IA64.

The answer was NOT as you are reading it --
With this 64-bit extension, they will allow programs to have 64-bit addressability.
In fact, the Prescott 64-bit extension is referred to earlier as "something called a 64-bit extension. -- definitely implying that Prescott's 64-bit extension is not as extensive as AMD64.

OK, let me point out another contradiction of your interpretation. In the first sentence (you say) he says Intel's 64-bit extensions to Prescott allow 64-bit addressing. In the second sentence, he says that Intel's extensions MIGHT have 64-bit registers and 64-bit function units.

Its blatantly obvious that any CPU that addresses 64-bits would HAVE to have 64-bit registers and function units! Otherwise, how could it calculate addresses? By saving carry flags? More proof that the second sentence of the second question is referring to the Prescott extensions, but the first sentence of the second question is referring to the Itanium.

Finally, if he meant to say that the Prescott so-called 64-bit extension implemented 64-bit addressing, why didn't he just answer the second question, "YES, it does" rather than introducing a new phrase, "With their 64-bit architecture."

64-bit extensions that include 64-bit addressing would threaten Itanium to extinction, and would contradict everything Intel has said on the subject since day one. Non-addressing-oriented extensions would do neither.

Petz