Re: Itanium versus Others
- From: CJT <abujlehc@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 28 Jul 2005 05:28:47 GMT
John Savard wrote:
Intel's Itanium chip is rather expensive, and its MHz speed is not as high as that of their Pentium 4 chips. Now, of course, we have the AMD 64 chips and Intel's EM64T. Is there a point to Itanium?
Wondering that, I looked up benchmark results, and found that as far as floating-point performance, at least, is concerned, there certainly is.
I also came across IBM's POWER5. It also performs comparably to an Itanium, but with a higher MHz speed. And I found out that the POWER5 isn't the same as the PowerPC G5 from IBM used in high-end Macintosh computers. It's considerably more powerful, and it is a bulky multi-chip module with four dual-core chips.
Since the POWER5 appears 'exotic', it does seem to me that the Itanium is just about the only 'supercomputer-like' chip easily available; and, of course, a single core providing the same throughput as eight cores will do it with considerably less latency as well.
John Savard http://www.quadibloc.com/index.html _________________________________________ Usenet Zone Free Binaries Usenet Server More than 120,000 groups Unlimited download http://www.usenetzone.com to open account
I'd be inclined to put the Itanium in the "exotic" category. It's a departure from mainstream architectures and not all that ubiquitous.
-- The e-mail address in our reply-to line is reversed in an attempt to minimize spam. Our true address is of the form che...@xxxxxxxxxxxx .
- References:
- Itanium versus Others
- From: John Savard
- Itanium versus Others
- Prev by Date: Itanium versus Others
- Next by Date: Re: Cluster computing drawbacks
- Previous by thread: Itanium versus Others
- Next by thread: Re: Itanium versus Others
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|