Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 13th Nov 2012 22:24 UTC
Thread beginning with comment 542516
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[2]: What about 64-bit only?
by zima on Thu 15th Nov 2012 06:22
in reply to "RE: What about 64-bit only?"
RE[3]: What about 64-bit only?
by Neolander on Thu 15th Nov 2012 07:26
in reply to "RE[2]: What about 64-bit only?"
Plus, isn't amd64 effectively a superset of x86? Meaning you can't really implement the former without major parts of the latter?
Yeah, AMD64 also follows a logic that's very similar to that of x68, but I don't know if Intel's license/patents/whatever prevents people from doing what they want with x86 go this far.
Edited 2012-11-15 07:30 UTC
RE[3]: What about 64-bit only?
by twitterfire on Thu 15th Nov 2012 12:36
in reply to "RE[2]: What about 64-bit only?"
Data is 64 bit, instructions can use 16, 32 or 64 bits.
For example:
mov ah, bh //16 bit
mov ax, bx //32 bit
mov rax, rbx // 64 bit
Intel patents cover instruction set so you can't have x64 only cpus without infringing Intel's patents.
So that's why hardware patents are as bad as software patents because they hinder competition.




Member since:
2010-03-08
Does Windows 64-bit Vista/7/8 have 32-bit code still lingering that would keep them from running on AMD chips? Would we lose instructions like sse or do they have 64-bit versions? Most importantly, would any chips be grandfathered in so while new chips would lose 32-bit instructions, the new company could still produce the current line of CPUs while they make the transition?
I would see two problems with that:
1/AMD64 processors start in x86 compatibility mode as an architectural decision, so removing x86 support would effectively imply creating a new incompatible processor architecture (similarly to what was done in IA-64... and it bombed)
2/Even with fully 64-bit operating systems, most user software is still 32-bit. An x86 compatibility mode would thus be necessary in order to execute it.
Edited 2012-11-14 15:06 UTC