Intel Publishes "X86-S" Specification For 64-bit Only Architecture

[rmfx]

Skimming the dried part of an old dogsh!t doesn't make it a chocolate ice cream.

[darkonix]

Timeline?

Sometime just before eternity. Just wait.

[smitty3268]

Missunderstanding, I was talking about reading 64 bit (or 40 bit in those days) address space with the techonlogy we had at this time.

2^40 / 3 GB/s = ~5 min with 48 bits (first Opteron) it's allready hours.

In that case, the relevant comparison is how long it would take today's technology to scan through a full 128 bit memory address space, which is.... quite a bit more than a mere few hours.

[MorrisS.]

I wonder cpus manufacturers haven't yet moved on pure 64bit units since several years ago.

[Anux]

I wonder cpus manufacturers haven't yet moved on pure 64bit units since several years ago.

Nothing to wonder, there is a bunch of 32 bit bussiness software from ages ago still in use. And Intel probably learned it's lesson about breaking backwards compatibility.

[Weasel]

In that case, the relevant comparison is how long it would take today's technology to scan through a full 128 bit memory address space, which is.... quite a bit more than a mere few hours.

At 40 GB/s that would be 251,230,855,258,321,719,918 years (251 quintillion years), let's say the Universe will probably end by then.

[MorrisS.]

Nothing to wonder, there is a bunch of 32 bit bussiness software from ages ago still in use. And Intel probably learned it's lesson about breaking backwards compatibility.

This "company" can continue to use legacy 32bit software. there is no problem.

[Anux]

This "company" can continue to use legacy 32bit software. there is no problem.

Sure, did I say otherwise?

[MorrisS.]

Sure, did I say otherise?

If a company cannot invest financial resources in new hardware cannot invest new resources in modern software too.

[Anux]

If a company cannot invest financial resources in new hardware cannot invest new resources in modern software too.

Sorry I don't know what you're trying to say.

You initially asked, why Intel and others are not producing pure 64 bit CPUs without backwards compatibility and I told you why and gave a hint what happend last time Intel tried this move (Itanium).

If Intel would drop 32 bit support completely without something incredible (double the performance and efficiency) AMD could offer 32 bit compat and gain much market share. If Intel could offer something like rosetta2 that might change things but Apple also has special hardware in its CPUs to make this fast. This is not much better than offering the classic 32 bit compat mode and change nothing.