Linked by Nicholas Blachford on Wed 9th Jul 2003 16:43 UTC
Talk, Rumors, X Versus Y This article started life when I was asked to write a comparison of x86 and PowerPC CPUs for work. We produce PowerPC based systems and are often asked why we use PowerPC CPUs instead of x86 so a comparison is rather useful. While I have had an interest in CPUs for quite some time but I have never explored this issue in any detail so writing the document proved an interesting exercise. I thought my conclusions would be of interest to OSNews readers so I've done more research and written this new, rather more detailed article. This article is concerned with the technical differences between the families not the market differences.
Permalink for comment
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Bad Athemeus!
by stingerman on Sun 13th Jul 2003 05:02 UTC

>>So which 64 bit Windows OS is it that's not in the making? This one for x86-64: http://www.amd.com/us-en/Processors/ProductInformation/0,,30_118_88... >>

Read my original post: " Microsoft has no plans to develop a 64-bit DESKTOP OS" (All caps added for emphasis). Everyone knows about the 64-bit Server version, but there is no Windows desktop version! And, there doesn't seen to be one planned for the near future. The nice thing about the 970 (G5) processor is that IBM added Bridge instructions to allow OS X to quickly be ported and OS X can physically address the entire 64-bit memory space, though its VM will still be 32-bit for now but with the added advantage that each 4GB RAM bank can be addressed by each processor separately at the same time. Apps can use every 64-bit instruction available to them in the no-supervisor (OS Exclusive) mode of the processor, which non-OS apps only have access to anyway.