Replies to post #26659 on Advanced Micro Devices Inc (AMD)

[sgolds]

Windsock, if you bothered to look at the programming manuals available easily on AMD's web site then you would see that the 64-bit instruction set is an entirely new instruction set, not an extension from 32-bit at all. It totally replaces x86-32 instructions (which are supported natively in other modes).

Your statement is 100% incorrect.

[HailMary]

The number of instructions for the 64 bit extension to the IA32 instructions set is trivial in number.

While the number of new instructions is trivial, the details are not. The new 64-bit long mode with compatibility sub mode is pretty significant. It is what will allow windows 64 to run all existing 32 bit windows apps.

Everyone is focused too much on the instruction set itself, and not the more important stuff like new modes, extra general purpose registers, and protection features. Nothing revolutionary, but you don't need to or want to reinvent the wheel, especially when compatibility is the most important concern.

I wouldn't call it an extension, but I wouldn't call it a new architecture either. It is an evolution. If Intel markets it as IA-32E, I think it will only hurt them to not identify it clearly a 64-bit capable processor. Maybe not today, but within a year or so. Perhaps by then they'll have a better marketing name for it.

[wmbz]

WindSock, hahahahaha, Same goes for IA32. Isn't that an extension also? I guess we should call the current ISA the Z80 ISA?


C