64-Bit CPUs: AMD Hammer vs. Intel IA-64

Reply

Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 14
Reputation: master Blacktop is an unknown quantity at this point 
Solved Threads: 0
master Blacktop's Avatar
master Blacktop master Blacktop is offline Offline
Newbie Poster

64-Bit CPUs: AMD Hammer vs. Intel IA-64

 
0
  #1
Feb 1st, 2005
It's always fun to root for the underdog. It's the American way to cheer for the little guy, hoping he'll triumph over the dark forces of--ironically enough--Corporate America. AMD has been squarely in the underdog role for quite awhile now, but the brewing Hammer v. Itanium match-up will take that to a whole new level.

IA-64 is a new VLIW design that has x86 compatibility tacked on; Hammer is a real x86 processor (albeit one with 64-bit extensions) just like Athlon, K6, and AMD's other processors before it. The two product lines are now heading down separate paths. You're always the winner when you run a race by yourself. But when you reach that finish line, are you anyplace you want to be?

In this second part of our three-part analysis on 64-bit computing architectures, we'll delve into Hammer's microarchitecture and compare/contrast to Itanium's existing design coming up design.
Hammer's external interfaces are as interesting as Itanium's are dull. First off, Hammer includes two double data-rate (DDR) controllers that directly manage external SDRAM memory. The memory bus can be either 64 bits or 128 bits wide, and requires no glue logic. This compares favorably to Itanium's generic (and short-lived) system bus, which requires a separate Intel controller chip to make sense of memory.
Sexier still, Hammer includes three (count 'em!) HyperTransport links, an obvious advantage over Itanium in multiprocessing. This bus is relatively open and has bandwidth to spare. Depending on how you arrange them, up to eight Hammer processors can seamlessly communicate amongst themselves using nothing but their built-in HyperTransport links. Anybody remember the Transputer? Whereas Itanium processors have to share a system bus, each Hammer gets its own private memory, courtesy of its on-chip SDRAM controller. (The first Hammer processor, Clawhammer, may only support two processors using a single HyperTransport link).
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message  
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 854
Reputation: nizzy1115 is an unknown quantity at this point 
Solved Threads: 15
nizzy1115's Avatar
nizzy1115 nizzy1115 is offline Offline
Practically a Posting Shark

Re: 64-Bit CPUs: AMD Hammer vs. Intel IA-64

 
0
  #2
Feb 1st, 2005
Originally Posted by master Blacktop
It's always fun to root for the underdog. It's the American way to cheer for the little guy, hoping he'll triumph over the dark forces of--ironically enough--Corporate America. AMD has been squarely in the underdog role for quite awhile now, but the brewing Hammer v. Itanium match-up will take that to a whole new level.

IA-64 is a new VLIW design that has x86 compatibility tacked on; Hammer is a real x86 processor (albeit one with 64-bit extensions) just like Athlon, K6, and AMD's other processors before it. The two product lines are now heading down separate paths. You're always the winner when you run a race by yourself. But when you reach that finish line, are you anyplace you want to be?

In this second part of our three-part analysis on 64-bit computing architectures, we'll delve into Hammer's microarchitecture and compare/contrast to Itanium's existing design coming up design.
Hammer's external interfaces are as interesting as Itanium's are dull. First off, Hammer includes two double data-rate (DDR) controllers that directly manage external SDRAM memory. The memory bus can be either 64 bits or 128 bits wide, and requires no glue logic. This compares favorably to Itanium's generic (and short-lived) system bus, which requires a separate Intel controller chip to make sense of memory.
Sexier still, Hammer includes three (count 'em!) HyperTransport links, an obvious advantage over Itanium in multiprocessing. This bus is relatively open and has bandwidth to spare. Depending on how you arrange them, up to eight Hammer processors can seamlessly communicate amongst themselves using nothing but their built-in HyperTransport links. Anybody remember the Transputer? Whereas Itanium processors have to share a system bus, each Hammer gets its own private memory, courtesy of its on-chip SDRAM controller. (The first Hammer processor, Clawhammer, may only support two processors using a single HyperTransport link).
Good post very interesting! Ive been waiting for these intel 64's!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message  
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 570
Reputation: Coconut Monkey is an unknown quantity at this point 
Solved Threads: 13
Team Colleague
Coconut Monkey's Avatar
Coconut Monkey Coconut Monkey is offline Offline
Inside your PC

Re: 64-Bit CPUs: AMD Hammer vs. Intel IA-64

 
0
  #3
Feb 2nd, 2005
Please cite the original author or website Blacktop - it's clear that you did not write that post yourself.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message  
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 14
Reputation: master Blacktop is an unknown quantity at this point 
Solved Threads: 0
master Blacktop's Avatar
master Blacktop master Blacktop is offline Offline
Newbie Poster

Re: 64-Bit CPUs: AMD Hammer vs. Intel IA-64

 
0
  #4
Feb 2nd, 2005
[QUOTE= nizzy amen brother
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message  
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 14
Reputation: master Blacktop is an unknown quantity at this point 
Solved Threads: 0
master Blacktop's Avatar
master Blacktop master Blacktop is offline Offline
Newbie Poster

Re: 64-Bit CPUs: AMD Hammer vs. Intel IA-64

 
0
  #5
Feb 2nd, 2005
[QUOTE=Coconut Monkey i'm not causeing problems but that is my post that i made up. i just trying to make friends and i write alot.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message  
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 570
Reputation: Coconut Monkey is an unknown quantity at this point 
Solved Threads: 13
Team Colleague
Coconut Monkey's Avatar
Coconut Monkey Coconut Monkey is offline Offline
Inside your PC

Re: 64-Bit CPUs: AMD Hammer vs. Intel IA-64

 
0
  #6
Feb 2nd, 2005
Originally Posted by master Blacktop
In this second part of our three-part analysis on 64-bit computing architectures, we'll delve into Hammer's microarchitecture and compare/contrast to Itanium's existing design coming up design.
*cough*
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message  
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 3,826
Reputation: Catweazle is a jewel in the rough Catweazle is a jewel in the rough Catweazle is a jewel in the rough Catweazle is a jewel in the rough 
Solved Threads: 144
Team Colleague
Catweazle Catweazle is offline Offline
Grandad
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 1,620
Reputation: kc0arf is a jewel in the rough kc0arf is a jewel in the rough kc0arf is a jewel in the rough 
Solved Threads: 51
Team Colleague
kc0arf kc0arf is offline Offline
Posting Virtuoso

Re: 64-Bit CPUs: AMD Hammer vs. Intel IA-64

 
0
  #8
Feb 2nd, 2005
Hello,

I have banned him for 7 days due to the plagarization of the article.

Christian
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message  
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 295
Reputation: szukalski is an unknown quantity at this point 
Solved Threads: 1
szukalski szukalski is offline Offline
Posting Whiz in Training

Re: 64-Bit CPUs: AMD Hammer vs. Intel IA-64

 
0
  #9
Feb 2nd, 2005
Hahaha. I thought this was pretty old news.
Overclocking is for geeks. I'm such a geek.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message  
Reply

This thread is more than three months old.
Perhaps start a new thread instead?
Message:



Similar Threads
Other Threads in the Motherboards, CPUs and RAM Forum
Thread Tools Search this Thread



About Us | Contact Us | Advertise | DaniWeb | Acceptable Use Policy | RSS Feed

©2003 - 2009 DaniWeb® LLC