Most promising CPU architecture

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • bascule
    omgpwnies!
    • Jul 2003
    • 1946

    #1

    Most promising CPU architecture

    Well, the people demand polls, hope this one at least gets some interesting results...

    Now that it has Intel's backing, it seems that x86-64/x86_64/AMD64 is the bonafide successor to IA32, and that we can safely assume that a few years down the road, IA32 will be effectively obsolete.

    This seems to have lead to a lot of speculation (by primarily not-too-bright individuals) that x86-64 will become something of a universal industry standard, and that Opteron/Xeon 64 and its successors will slowly (i.e approximately a decade) find their way into the high end server space, replacing old enterprise computing standbys like SPARC, POWER, PA-RISC, and MIPS (and eventually dooming Itanium as well). The primary argument is that the initial outlay of commodity processors will remain low, but that they are already gaining features comparable to enterprise processors like SMT, hot swapability, MCE, larger caches, better memory management, and higher throughput, which will ultimately bring them to the same level of TCO as their enterprise counterparts.

    We'll see... for now Opteron has relatively little backing by tier 1 vendors (i.e. Sun, IBM), who are only offering 1-2 processor single image systems (although IBM has a nice Opteron blade server offering). There's been announcements of enterprise caliber Opteron systems with 64 processors or more (by HP I believe? I don't have a URL offhand), but for now Opteron remains primarily a processor for the DIY crowd.

    Personally I think Intel and HP will see their investments into Itanium through until the end, that HP will continue to slowly retire their PA-RISC and AlphaServer lines while coaxing their existing customer base onto IA64. Furthermore, I see HP buying SGI sometime in the near future... SGI has some excellent IP and seems to be ahead of everyone, with the possible exception of IBM, in the race to make Linux enterprise-worthy, and most of all, SGI has been a wholehearted adopter of IA64 (they still continue to develop MIPS, but not too terribly actively) Ultimately, I see HP overtaking Sun permanently in the server market, and pushing Linux/HP-UX on IA64.

    I also forsee increased collaboration between Sun and Fujitsu, with technologies from UltraSPARC and SPARC64 eventually merging into a line of collaboratively developed, massively SMT processors. IBM is doing much the same thing with Power5, which will support 4 hardware threads, and with such advanced fabrication plants as its Fishkill plant I expect they'll remain the leader in fabrication technologies, at least for the near future.

    That's just me attempting to peer into my crystal ball... ultimately my vote goes to Itanium... the current issues with inadequate compilers will slowly resolve themselves, and Intel and HP are in so deep already that they want to make up their losses by seeing it through to the end, rather than being bound to what are, in their eyes, inferior architectures (i.e. x86-64 for Intel, PA-RISC for HP)
    21
    IA64
    19.05%
    4
    SPARC
    9.52%
    2
    POWER
    9.52%
    2
    x86-64
    42.86%
    9
    None of the above
    19.05%
    4
    45 5F E1 04 22 CA 29 C4 93 3F 95 05 2B 79 2A B0
    45 5F E1 04 22 CA 29 C4 93 3F 95 05 2B 79 2A B1
    [ redacted ]
  • skroo
    Volatile Compound
    • Dec 2001
    • 2348

    #2
    Originally posted by bascule
    That's just me attempting to peer into my crystal ball... ultimately my vote goes to Itanium...
    My personal feeling is that none of what Intel is doing is going to matter one bit as long as bus architectures remain constrictive of the CPU's ouput. Granted, asking for a 1:1 relationship between bus speeds and capacities and the CPU is pushing it, but if they're serious about going up against SGI and Sun, they really need to start looking at how to get more data to and from the hardware more effectively.

    Just my $0.02.

    Comment

    • Chris
      Great Satan of the East
      • Oct 2001
      • 2866

      #3
      Originally posted by bascule
      Ultimately, I see HP overtaking Sun permanently in the server market, and pushing Linux/HP-UX on IA64.
      God I hope not, unless they SERIOUSLY rethink the file system/file structure on HP-UX.

      I don't know of a more cumbersome and unintuitive version of *nix out there. I'd rather use AIX....hell...I'd probably rather use Fedora, and THAT'S saying something coming from me.
      perl -e 'print pack(c5, (41*2), sqrt(7056), (unpack(c,H)-2), oct(115), 10)'

      Comment

      • bascule
        omgpwnies!
        • Jul 2003
        • 1946

        #4
        Originally posted by skroo
        My personal feeling is that none of what Intel is doing is going to matter one bit as long as bus architectures remain constrictive of the CPU's ouput. Granted, asking for a 1:1 relationship between bus speeds and capacities and the CPU is pushing it, but if they're serious about going up against SGI and Sun, they really need to start looking at how to get more data to and from the hardware more effectively.
        This is largely a non-issue on the Itanium 2, which supports a 400MHz 128-bit bus with 6.4 GB/s of throughput, which matches the speed of the NUMAlink crossbar architecture utilized in SGI's Itanium 2-based Altix 3000. While NUMAlink can't quite match the 9.6GB/s of throughput offered by Sun's Fireplane crossbar architecture, the Itanium 2 outperforms the UltraSPARC III's 4.8GB/s of bus bandwidth.

        In the case of the Opteron, the processor has more I/O than it can effectively utilize at a single time... between its on-die dual channel memory controller and three hypertransport channels it supports a whopping 25.6GB/s of I/O.
        Last edited by bascule; February 29, 2004, 13:51.
        45 5F E1 04 22 CA 29 C4 93 3F 95 05 2B 79 2A B0
        45 5F E1 04 22 CA 29 C4 93 3F 95 05 2B 79 2A B1
        [ redacted ]

        Comment

        • bascule
          omgpwnies!
          • Jul 2003
          • 1946

          #5
          Originally posted by 0versight
          I dont see HP taking over what Sun has......actually Hell no that isnt happening.
          I was merely saying that HP would overtake Sun's position as the number one server vendor permanently. This has happened briefly three times already (it happened the last quarter of 2003), but Sun always manages to regain their position.

          In my mind the easiest way for HP to clinch this is to buy SGI, a company with a market capitalization of only $685 million, an enormous amount of intellectual property, and a vast assortment of Itanium based products including the most advanced Itanium server yet designed, the Altix 3000, with backing by players like Oracle. It would seem like a no brainer for HP to buy SGI, although HP seems to have a much more vested interest in HP-UX/IA64 rather than pushing Linux into the enterprise like SGI and IBM are attempting to do.

          Obviously losing the #1 server vendor spot to HP would likely not have a dramatic impact on Sun's day-to-day operations, and Sun certainly isn't moving away from SPARC any time soon.

          Sun has too much invested into their architectures for them to migrate to x86 or whatever the fuck HP is going to support.
          To be fair, Sun is one of only two tier 1 players backing Opteron. HP, with their enormous financial investment in IA64, will continue backing that and moving their PA-RISC customers to it.

          As we can see Sun's x86 was complete crap, it would take years and complete dedication from that company to turn what they are capable from sparc into x86.
          Sun has realized the need to diversify their product line and has begun agressively optimizing Solaris for x86-64... of course it will never be more than a second class citizen compared to the SPARC version.
          45 5F E1 04 22 CA 29 C4 93 3F 95 05 2B 79 2A B0
          45 5F E1 04 22 CA 29 C4 93 3F 95 05 2B 79 2A B1
          [ redacted ]

          Comment

          • dYn4mic
            technologist
            • Jan 2004
            • 315

            #6
            Maybe the Transmeta architecture?
            I don't know too much about it, but its really power friendly... good for small devices like PDA's and tablet PC's..
            Looks like its getting a boost from AMD...
            http://news.com.com/2100-1006-991673.html
            The only constant in the universe is change itself

            Comment

            • JiTRiF
              Member
              • Mar 2004
              • 54

              #7
              Fuck Intel! Intel is like the microsoft of CPUs, the only reason they don't have a monopoly is that they haven't bought out AMD which they probably could. Just like how Microsoft could potentially kill Apple, but they don't because that would be another monopoly.
              "A Macintosh will not crash, ever"
              --The Tobacco Industry

              Comment

              • bascule
                omgpwnies!
                • Jul 2003
                • 1946

                #8
                This just in! (Yesterday, but /. and its ilk haven't picked it up yet) Dell to release Opteron systems:

                http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/61/35965.html
                45 5F E1 04 22 CA 29 C4 93 3F 95 05 2B 79 2A B0
                45 5F E1 04 22 CA 29 C4 93 3F 95 05 2B 79 2A B1
                [ redacted ]

                Comment

                • dYn4mic
                  technologist
                  • Jan 2004
                  • 315

                  #9
                  Sweet.. I wish i had money..
                  Also the next AMD 64 FX-51 (i think its called FX-52) should be VERY cool... I hope to build my next box around a AMD 64 FX chip.
                  Intel~Microsoft
                  The only constant in the universe is change itself

                  Comment

                  • bascule
                    omgpwnies!
                    • Jul 2003
                    • 1946

                    #10
                    Originally posted by dYn4mic
                    Sweet.. I wish i had money..
                    Also the next AMD 64 FX-51 (i think its called FX-52) should be VERY cool... I hope to build my next box around a AMD 64 FX chip.
                    Heh, the Athlon 64 FX-51 chips are actually Opterons which failed QA and have two defective HyperTransport controllers
                    45 5F E1 04 22 CA 29 C4 93 3F 95 05 2B 79 2A B0
                    45 5F E1 04 22 CA 29 C4 93 3F 95 05 2B 79 2A B1
                    [ redacted ]

                    Comment

                    • KeLviN
                      Poor but happy
                      • Jul 2002
                      • 1951

                      #11
                      Originally posted by dYn4mic
                      Maybe the Transmeta architecture?
                      I don't know too much about it, but its really power friendly... good for small devices like PDA's and tablet PC's..
                      Looks like its getting a boost from AMD...
                      http://news.com.com/2100-1006-991673.html
                      transmetta isnt an archetecture, its a company. like intel, amd, or Mc Donalds. transmetta makes the low power consumption, crusoe series. crusoe isnt an archetecture either.
                      Last edited by KeLviN; March 6, 2004, 00:33.
                      the fresh prince of 1337

                      To learn how to hack; submit your request

                      Comment

                      • bascule
                        omgpwnies!
                        • Jul 2003
                        • 1946

                        #12
                        Originally posted by KeLviN
                        transmetta isnt an archetecture, its a company. like intel, amd, or Mc Donalds. transmetta makes the low power consumption, crusoe series. crusoe isnt an archetecture either.
                        Actually, Crusoe is an architecture. Crusoe implements a software x86 translation layer which dynamically optimizes while translating instructions to its native 128-bit VLIW ISA (taking 4 32-bit instructions per cycle). You can read about it on their web page:

                        http://www.transmeta.com/crusoe/vliw.html
                        45 5F E1 04 22 CA 29 C4 93 3F 95 05 2B 79 2A B0
                        45 5F E1 04 22 CA 29 C4 93 3F 95 05 2B 79 2A B1
                        [ redacted ]

                        Comment

                        • KeLviN
                          Poor but happy
                          • Jul 2002
                          • 1951

                          #13
                          i read it. its still utalizing x86 standards. saying it translates is the same as saying it processes....
                          the fresh prince of 1337

                          To learn how to hack; submit your request

                          Comment

                          • bascule
                            omgpwnies!
                            • Jul 2003
                            • 1946

                            #14
                            Originally posted by KeLviN
                            i read it. its still utalizing x86 standards. saying it translates is the same as saying it processes....
                            Yes, but the beauty of the Transmeta architecture is that in order to adapt it to a new ISA you only need to rewrite the software layer... you don't actually have to alter the core design.
                            45 5F E1 04 22 CA 29 C4 93 3F 95 05 2B 79 2A B0
                            45 5F E1 04 22 CA 29 C4 93 3F 95 05 2B 79 2A B1
                            [ redacted ]

                            Comment

                            Working...