AMD lied about 64 bit OPERTON!

[The Reaper]

i just realized something, after reading several websites. everyone seems to be claiming that the 64 bit Opteron will beat apple to the desktop arena when it it actually released, and that apple misled us. i will show you WHY the G5 deserves the title, regardless of when the Opteron is on market (either tomorrow, or last year, makes no difference: you'll see why). so here's the truth (please be patient):

AMD claims to have 64 bit Opteron chips coming to market soon, and that these chips are able to run 32 bit code in non emulation. this is supposedly so that you can use that 1 new 64bit app with all of your old 32 bit apps, rather than being restricted to just 64 bit apps (not much software is 64 bit, so this backward compatability is important). but here is where things get interesting:

The Opteron CANNOT run 32 bit and 64 bit apps AT THE SAME TIME!

so, if you are using some 64 bit program, and you decide you want to play some unreal tournament, you have to REBOOT your computer in 32 bit mode! this is NOT acceptable for a 'desktop' chip, whose main markets are science or graphics professionals that switch frequently between open programs.

the G5, by contrast, can run both types of apps simultaneously. basically, with the G5, the user never notices whether they are usng a 64 bit app or a 32 bit app (aside from subtle performance differences). an Opteron user has to make a VERY obvious distinction, EVERY TIME they wish to use them. the Opteron is not an effective way of bridging the 32 bit/64 bit gap. the G5 IS.

so if ever a PC user says that the G5 was not the first to be a 64 bit desktop chip, just remind them that the Opteron is pretty much as useless as the Itanium; if they want to run a 64 bit program, they will have to do so in an environment where VERY few other 64 bit apps are developed (this is one reason why the Itanium was a failure). such 64 bit functionality (or lack thereof) is useless to a desktop user. what is useful is an environment that can run all legacy apps with the new 64 bit apps: like running 32 bit iTunes in the background to 64 bit Photoshop.

so apple will be ahead of the industry for some time (until the NEXT generation of chips come from AMD (matbe next year), or when Intel makes their entry into the 64 bit desktop arena (which will be a few years away).

just some thoughts.

 

[P-Worm]

If this is true, then I am convinced that Apple covered their bases when they made all of their claims about the G5. Some how this machine seems to look better and better every day.

P-Worm

 

[The Reaper]

also, someone on another site referrenced an AMD page which seemed to contradict my statements. so to anyone who looks at the following website:

http://www.amd.com/us-en/Processors/ProductInformation/0,,30_118_8825,00.html

here is my response.

The AMD Opteron™ processor, enabling simultaneous 32- and 64-bit computing

interestingly enough, this is one way of saying that the Opteron can run both 32 bit and 64 bit processes, to distinguish it from previous chips (32 bit only like the pentium, or 64 bit only like the Itanium). a restart is required to switch between the 2 environments. however, the Operton, in 64 bit mode, is also able to run 32 bit apps in emulation. more on this later.

The AMD Opteron processor is designed to run existing 32-bit applications with outstanding performance and offers customers a simplified migration path to 64-bit computing.

VERY cleverly worded. i'll break it down simply: in 32 bit mode, the chip runs 32 bit software with 'outstanding performance'. as 64 bit software becomes available, you can run it in 64 bit mode on the same chip (of course, only after a restart). NO WHERE does it say that it can run both 32 bit and 64 bit processes at the same time in NON EMULATION. the non emulation 32 bit capabilities the site refers to are in reference to the chip in 32 bit mode - switch to 64 bit, and you're back to emulating your 32 bit code. basically, that 'outstanding performance' advantage is suddenly lost.

what AMD has relied on is readers merging the above 2 quotes and assuming that the chip can run "existing 32-bit applications with outstanding performance" while simultaneously running 64 bit software. Trust me, if it really could do this, they would say it very blatantly everywhere on that page, rather than hinting it.

 

[Catfish_Man]

Opteron (NOT Operton) is most definitely a 32/64 bit hybrid (and it's already shipping). It can run both types of apps at the same time (it does switch between modes, but it does so extremely quickly, without a reboot. The G5/970 does a similar thing). The reason Apple claims "first 64 bit desktop computer" is because Opteron is not a desktop chip. Nice try, but get your facts straight first.

Also, Itanium isn't over yet. It's been a failure for the first 13 years of its life because it sucked and didn't have any software. Now it's FINALLY getting past that and providing effective competition against IBM's POWER chips. It should be an interesting battle.

Intel plans to enter the 64 bit desktop market in 2007 at the earliest, from what I've read.

 

[spercharged69]

So wait, AMD has released their 64 bit desktop processor first, but Apple still gets the title for having the first 64 bit desktop processor? The G5 is essentially vaporware right now, regardless of how many have been ordered, the fact remains that the only people who have even seen the G5 are NASA employees and a few other choice individuals...

Where as the Opteron has been out for a while now, working great running 64bit builds of Linux. Some guys I know have an Opteron-powered machine, RIGHT NOW. In fact, I believe they did when Apple first started announcing all this 'the first 64 bit desktop garbage.' It's just Apple marketing hype, they're guilty of it just like about every other company.

You guys just need to accept the fact that the Apple marketing campaigns are usually targeted at people who aren't very computer savvy, so they can make crazy false claims like that and 99% of the people who see the ads will never know the difference

On that note, I can't wait until I can go buy a G5 at an APPLE STORE, as oppose to just ordering online from seeing a few pictures.

 

[Catfish_Man]

Originally posted by io_burn
So wait, AMD has released their 64 bit desktop processor first, but Apple still gets the title for having the first 64 bit desktop processor? The G5 is essentially vaporware right now, regardless of how many have been ordered, the fact remains that the only people who have even seen the G5 are NASA employees and a few other choice individuals...

Where as the Opteron has been out for a while now, working great running 64bit builds of Linux. Some guys I know have an Opteron-powered machine, RIGHT NOW. In fact, I believe they did when Apple first started announcing all this 'the first 64 bit desktop garbage.' It's just Apple marketing hype, they're guilty of it just like about every other company.

You guys just need to accept the fact that the Apple marketing campaigns are usually targeted at people who aren't very computer savvy, so they can make crazy false claims like that and 99% of the people who see the ads will never know the difference

On that note, I can't wait until I can go buy a G5 at an APPLE STORE, as oppose to just ordering online from seeing a few pictures.

Apple points out that Opteron is not a desktop processor. Some people would say the G5 isn't a desktop either (that it's a workstation). I'm not sure who's right.

 

[Sun Baked]

Originally posted by io_burn
So wait, AMD has released their 64 bit desktop processor first, but Apple still gets the title for having the first 64 bit desktop processor? The G5 is essentially vaporware right now, regardless of how many have been ordered, the fact remains that the only people who have even seen the G5 are NASA employees and a few other choice individuals...

The Opteron is NOT AMD's desktop 64 processor -- it's AMD's server/workstation chip. It's not a processor for joe redneck.

The Athlon-64 is AMD's 64-bit "desktop" processor, and was scheduled for September release.

 

[The Reaper]

apple defines desktop processors based on price. the G5 is clearly priced as a high end desktop, as most workstations are significantly more expensive. as for the Opteron being exclusively a workstation chip, i am NOT denying this, i am simply stating common perception (i have heard many PC users claim that the Opteron will be the first 64 bit desktop). everyone knows that 64 bit has been out for some time now, just not in desktops. many PC users will claim that the Operton is a desktop chip, so rather than get into that (relatively futile) argument, i have put forth another.

 

[spercharged69]

So the difference between a server chip and a desktop chip is how they market the product? Working in the IT field, I know lots of people who a) make too much money and b) enjoy having INSANE computer equipment. Whether or not the processor is marketed as a desktop processor to people like this is irrelevant. The point of the matter is 64 bit chips have been ON THE MARKET, and EASILY useable in any desktop machine, assuming you're die hard enough and have the funding to afford it.

 

[The Reaper]

So the difference between a server chip and a desktop chip is how they market the product? Working in the IT field, I know lots of people who a) make too much money and b) enjoy having INSANE computer equipment. Whether or not the processor is marketed as a desktop processor to people like this is irrelevant. The point of the matter is 64 bit chips have been ON THE MARKET, and EASILY useable in any desktop machine, assuming you're die hard enough and have the funding to afford it.

well, in many (not all) cases, the workstations of today are the desktops of tomorrow. the G5 is basically offering workstation features with desktop pricing. they are not trying to compete with other workstations, they are competing with high end desktops. i have no doubt that both markets will have some use for the G5, but if apple wanted to compete with workstations full on, they could have racked up the price big time and maybe allow for quad systems, more PCI slots, more HDs etc.

i think that apple has taken 64 bit processing, which was previously reserved for

people who a) make too much money and b) enjoy having INSANE computer equipment

and made it available to the mainstream. '64 bit computing... for the rest of us.'

 

[cubist]

As far as the "first 64-bit desktop" claim goes, both DEC and Sun shipped 64-bit desktop machines years ago. They may have been a little more expensive, but the Sun Ultra 5, for example, is in the same price ballpark as the G5, has a smaller case, runs commercial software, etc.

That being said, I think the "most powerful personal computer" claim is still valid. The G5 will run circles around any of Sun's desktop machines.

As for the Opteron, one company claims to have shipped one machine. I haven't seen any Opteron machines for sale. The Athlon 64 will probably not be available until well into 2004.

As for the Itanium, aka the Itanic ... prices are absurdly high, and performance is terrible. It is the return of the IAPX-432. Shut the door, the corpse is beginning to smell.

 

[spercharged69]

Err... you guys realize you can build your own PC right? From parts? That's the easiest/cheapest way get a 64bit PC Desktop... Unlike Apple you don't have to wait until Dell puts it in a case for you.

 

[Catfish_Man]

Originally posted by cubist

As for the Itanium, aka the Itanic ... prices are absurdly high, and performance is terrible. It is the return of the IAPX-432. Shut the door, the corpse is beginning to smell.

2000+ SPECfp is terrible?

 

[spercharged69]

Originally posted by Catfish_Man
2000+ SPECfp is terrible?

Meh, just let the Apple extremists stretch any biased facts they can to prove that Apple is the best and everything else is a load of horse crap. It's standard operating procedure for anyone who spells Microsoft 'Micro$oft' and Itanium 'Itanic'

 

[edesignuk]

Originally posted by cubist

As for the Opteron, one company claims to have shipped one machine. I haven't seen any Opteron machines for sale. The Athlon 64 will probably not be available until well into 2004.

As io_burn has just said, just because no one is selling pre-built systems with them, doesn't mean you can't have your own 64-bit desktop NOW.

http://www.dabs.com/2N77
http://www.dabs.com/2N7H

There is such a thing as building your own system, in the PC world anyway.

edit: For links to work u need to have any pop-up blocking disabled.

 

[straphound]

Athlon 64

The Athlon 64 processor will be out in Sept and there will be different versions with the top end essentially being the same as the Opteron being a 1 MB cache processor that runs in the same socket as their "workstation" processor. They will be very similar processors it appears.

 

[The Reaper]

Err... you guys realize you can build your own PC right? From parts? That's the easiest/cheapest way get a 64bit PC Desktop... Unlike Apple you don't have to wait until Dell puts it in a case for you.

but you don't get:

9(!!!) fans to keep the noise down

lower power costs (cooler chips) - it makes a difference!

1ghz frontside bus

Highest bandwidth system controller

Altivec (and the x86 equivalents do not count!)

the G5 itself: it may well be the fastest commercial chip, period.

although i would like to add that a DIY PC cannot run OSX, i do not want to 'taint' this particular post with a strong mac bias. also, some important workstation apps do not run on OSX.

it is likely that you will find some of the above features/components (or equivalents), but you will probably not be able to combine them all to make a berrer/equal deal than what apple is offering. many 3rd party manufacturers do not have the R&D resources that apple can put into elements such as their 9 fan design. also, factor in the time you spend hunting down the right 3rd party products and assembling them yourself.

a lot of what makes the G5 so appealing is it's functionality: look at the inside of one to see what i mean. everything has an allocated space. the system has order. the handles on the case are another example of this functionality. even if you were to succeed in assembling your proposed 'value workstation', i doubt it would approach the functionality and elegance of the G5.

 

[The Reaper]

Err... you guys realize you can build your own PC right? From parts? That's the easiest/cheapest way get a 64bit PC Desktop... Unlike Apple you don't have to wait until Dell puts it in a case for you.

oh, wait, now i get what you were saying... you mean that you don't have to wait for dell (or whoever) to begin selling Opteron PCs because the chips themselves are already available, and that you can just build your own with them. in that case, sorry about the long 'G5 is good' post just above.

 

[sparkleytone]

Originally posted by io_burn
Meh, just let the Apple extremists stretch any biased facts they can to prove that Apple is the best and everything else is a load of horse crap. It's standard operating procedure for anyone who spells Microsoft 'Micro$oft' and Itanium 'Itanic'

yeah yeah, you took the trouble to register and post at macrumors.com, so you need to be well aware that this is going to happen.

that being said, the Itanium has yet to prove itself as a viable processor in ANY market. Its price : performance is ridiculously bad, and its a black sheep in the high end market because intel has yet to be successful with a high end server chip. Also, Itanium talk in the same breath as the G5 is flawed by principle, being that their target markets couldn't really be more different.

Yes, we can build PCs with parts bought individually. BUT, as the old retort goes, will it run OS X? No, it won't. I will therefore be staying away from said PC. Also, you don't get any real warranty from building your own PC, something important to non-hobbyists.

overall, i think its great the 64bit has come to the desktop and I could care less who was 'technically' first. The viable options are coming at around the same time, and I prefer the G5. The total package blows everything else away. Hardware can only be as good as the software that runs it.

 

[P-Worm]

sparkelytone is right, it doesn't make any difference at all who was first. But I'm sure that the price/performance of the G5 far outweighs the Optersuck. Oh sorry io_burn, I meant Opteron.

P-Worm

 

[spercharged69]

Originally posted by sparkleytone
yeah yeah, you took the trouble to register and post at macrumors.com, so you need to be well aware that this is going to happen.

Meh, I registered here because I'm interested in purchasing a G5 and a PowerBook (as soon as the're revised) in the next few months to replace my PC's. It's just amazingly disappointing to see the complete Apple fanboys I'd be allying myself with. According to these forums, this is the only benchmark Apple needs to provide for the G5 to sell it to you guys:

And that's just kind of sad.

 

[sparkleytone]

Originally posted by io_burn
Meh, I registered here because I'm interested in purchasing a G5 and a PowerBook (as soon as the're revised) in the next few months to replace my PC's. It's just amazingly disappointing to see the complete Apple fanboys I'd be allying myself with. According to these forums, this is the only benchmark Apple needs to provide for the G5 to sell it to you guys:

And that's just kind of sad.

hehe thats pretty good. nice image.

look, there are fanbois everywhere. thats pretty much the way the entire world is. if we can't find something to argue about, then what are we supposed to do with ourselves?

If you buy something else, then great for you. For me, OS X is the reason I switched. The hardware looks like its inferior on paper, but I bought this 600MHz processor iBook when I had a Celeron running at 900MHz on my desktop, and the P4 was just surfacing in the notebook world. I was skeptical, but I wanted OS X. Its the best computing purchase I have ever made. AND, it has gotten FASTER in the two years since I bought it; definitely something you don't see in the Microsoft software update world.

I like Linux but its not viable for me outside of being a cheap server. I can barely stand Windows, but its a mealticket when the going gets rough. OS X gives me a great and CONSISTENT user experience, an enormous amount of open source projects at my fingertips, and great stability.

For me personally Apple sells the best computers available. Only you can decide whats best for you.

 

[The Reaper]

If you buy something else, then great for you. For me, OS X is the reason I switched. The hardware looks like its inferior on paper, but I bought this 600MHz processor iBook when I had a Celeron running at 900MHz on my desktop, and the P4 was just surfacing in the notebook world. I was skeptical, but I wanted OS X. Its the best computing purchase I have ever made. AND, it has gotten FASTER in the two years since I bought it; definitely something you don't see in the Microsoft software update world.

just to clarify sparkleytone's point, each version of Mac OS X gets significantly aster. he wasn't claiming that macs just magically get better with age (no mac fanatic is that crazy). but i can say that every new version of windows i have ever used has always been progressively slower (ie they tend to need newer hardware). ever since OSX 10.0 (which, admittedly, was a joke), each progressive OSX version has run much faster on the same hardware. for exaple, apple optimized OSX 10.3 Panther to run even faster on old (5 years) hardware that would be outdated by now if it was in the windows world. it's nice to know that th purchases you make now will last you that long.

this post was made mainly for io_burn's benefit.

 

[trusted_content]

GO BACK TO GBS, IO_BURN

We have enough trouble with you trolling the Something Awful forums. Please don't bring it here.

 

[GetSome681]

Re: GO BACK TO GBS, IO_BURN

Originally posted by trusted_content
We have enough trouble with you trolling the Something Awful forums. Please don't bring it here.

P.S. - The Reaper - Partly the reason why OS X has been getting faster is because 10.0 was pretty ****ty to begin with.