Computer tech blog

[Smokey]

Well, i'm just used to the X standing for eXtended, like the A stands for Advanced...

But then again, i do still linger in those olden days of Computer technology...

Besides, XDR will eventually be surpassed by a faster technology, so what do we have to call that, because extreme is usually followed by ultimate, wich has no follow-up...

So all in all, i do hope to see XDRAM on AMD boards in the future, (just not the very near future, since i'm planning to buy a DDR2/3 board in the very near future)...

Man, looking at that MoBo of mine just gives me that feeling i want to mess around with lots of cheap hardware again and build something nice out of it...

Added after 1 minutes:

And with something nice, i actually mean a beatifully crafted, insanely complex to use computer wich has far to much power for it's age... ^_^

[Dr. Mario]

Very true. At least few companies are working on it. (ADR-DRAM, maybe?) And I think future GPGPU will use it first before any bebemoth CPU, or even a 128-bit x86 CPU will use 'em. (I know they already made the silicon chip, very much with High-K Metal Gate transistor process - they're pretty much test-driving it to see what falls apart first and make a list to either fix and improve - before middle 2010.)

[Smokey]

Wait, why would we need 128-bit computer technology...?

...64-bit architecture effectively increases the memory ceiling to 264 addresses, equivalent to approximately 17.2 billion gigabytes, 16.8 million terabytes, or 16 exabytes of RAM.

So, how interesting 128-bit CPU's are, and how much i do want one when they get here, i really don't see the need, because i don't see RAM technology evolving so quickly that it will give us 1EB memory modules...

And to achieve such vast quantities of RAM with current technology (i am using 4GB modules for this calculation) we would need 4.300.000.000 DIMMs... I don't really see the Motherboard real-estate for that, nor can i imagine any program or process wich will need such memory space...

But like i said, i would so totally want one if they come, just for the coolness of it...

[Dr. Mario]

Yeah, I get a picture now. Although it's still possible for the x86 CPU to evolve into 128-bit one, but will still have 64-bit physical address, anyways. And I knew about it and experimented with Extended Mode (128-bit mode) and ASM instructions are pretty much the same:
example: AL - AX - EAX - RAX - CAX

[Smokey]

Oh, we should be developing it, of course.... and it helps that the instructions don't differ that much...
We will reach the limit of 64-bit soon enough, just not the next 5 years or so... ^_^

We have a saying in holland justifying the 128-bit research and development: standing still is going backwards...

[Dr. Mario]

True. And the development on a 128-bit RISC engine for a x86-128 processor already have begun almost two years ago. And AMD Phenom is a perfect example of that - its FPU contains three 128-bit ALUs each cores.

[Smokey]

?? Are there such great numbers to be crunched today that it requires a 128 bit ALU?

[Dr. Mario]

Well, it's simply because Athlon 64 cannot catch up with the newest DX10 (and DX11) games and some of video files (like the ones off Blu-ray Disc) without using too many watts in one sitting. They're freaking math-intensive nowaday, that sometimes a 64-bit ALU inside the FPU circuitry can be never enough, so - as a part of R&D effort - they put few 128-bit ALUs in Phenom's modified FPU, to see what's really rolling.

[Smokey]

...Athlon 64 cannot catch up with the newest DX10 (and DX11) games and some of video files (like the ones off Blu-ray Disc) without using too many watts in one sitting.

;013

...Athlon 64 cannot catch up...

o_o

...cannot catch up...

;015

Then Intel better be hurting under those processes too.... Or i'll make em hurt...
Sorry, but it pains me to read such things as a die-hard AMD fan...

[Dr. Mario]

That was why AMD had to introduce Phenom CPU (although, thank to memory controller / Level 3 bug that some AMD engineers found, never succeeded. Phenom II did.) It's because AMD wanted to show Intel that it do have a liver to whack Intel out of their game, by giving everyone a taste of what a silicon-based speed demon should be. After all, I'm still an AMD fan. I use that Germanic gem daily. (If you look at the CPU heatslug, you will see that it's diffused in Germany.)

[Smokey]

Good ol' German Quality...
BTW, i just read about how BTX (the form factor) failed... and in there it said that

To date, AMD has offered few BTX product options and has emerged as major and viable player in the computer industry

Wich does sound logical, since AMD has bought up ATI and with that grew a great deal bigger...
So i shouldn't be too worried about AMD after all...
Besides AMD will probably live anyhow, if only to prevent intel from gaining monopoly(although it would please me more to see Intel reduced to that fate )...

[Dr. Mario]

Yup. AMD might be around for a long time.

Since AMD have signed the contract for XDR memory (along with PCIe and several others.) and AMD might let the leash of Phenom II's hidden extra horsepower once they get PC XDIMM together, and although long postponed, it will be very soon. Socket AM3 is definitely the one of the other that have XMC circuitry. Already looked at a picture of Deneb die. Looked at the RAM controller very carefully - it's a opened-paged multimode XIO, pretty much capable of running DDR.

[Smokey]

Well, i knew AM3, along with Phenom could handle DDR3 aswell as DD2, wich is one of the reasons i love that platform (i can buy the MoBo, and invest in Processor and RAM later ^_^), and if i remember correctly you said it could handle XDR, so that would mean Phenom is a real do-it-all... ^_^

[Dr. Mario]

Phenom's built-in XDR-DRAM support is all a part of stragetry - pretty much a surprise attack, and it's scaring Intel right now, Because: 1. a 4.0GHz XDR can easily outperform a GDDR5 of the same frequency. 2. It has support for DDR-II/III memory and CAN be used on an AM2+ motherboard (it already have a XDR Clock Generator on-die, for compatiblity reason.) 3. XIO controller isn't too pricey as they thought, Phenom II X4 is only $180. 4. It could just simply kills Core i7 when its FSB throughput gets big.

[Smokey]

Ah, so the empire of AMD strikes back... good to see, because they were losing ground to Intel lately...

Phenom II X4 is only $180.

Wait, wut?! a Phenom II x4 810 (that Deneb with 4x 2600MHz) cost â,¬179,- here, that is $236,10! Man i neet to find a way to get my hardware from the states...  :/