caml-list - the Caml user's mailing list
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* Support for 64bit Pentium?
@ 2005-11-30 18:31 Alessandro Baretta
  2005-11-30 18:49 ` [Caml-list] " David Brown
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: Alessandro Baretta @ 2005-11-30 18:31 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Ocaml

Shortly, most mainstream microprocessors will ship in 64 bit variants. I know 
that ocamlopt supports AMD64, but what about EM64T, or whatever the new Intel 
hype is called?

Alex


-- 
*********************************************************************
http://www.barettadeit.com/
Baretta DE&IT
A division of Baretta SRL

tel. +39 02 370 111 55
fax. +39 02 370 111 54

Our technology:

The Application System/Xcaml (AS/Xcaml)
<http://www.asxcaml.org/>

The FreerP Project
<http://www.freerp.org/>


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread

* Re: [Caml-list] Support for 64bit Pentium?
  2005-11-30 18:31 Support for 64bit Pentium? Alessandro Baretta
@ 2005-11-30 18:49 ` David Brown
  2005-11-30 19:03   ` David Teller
  2005-11-30 21:57   ` Brian Hurt
  0 siblings, 2 replies; 5+ messages in thread
From: David Brown @ 2005-11-30 18:49 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Alessandro Baretta; +Cc: Ocaml

On Wed, 2005-11-30 at 19:31 +0100, Alessandro Baretta wrote:
> Shortly, most mainstream microprocessors will ship in 64 bit variants. I know 
> that ocamlopt supports AMD64, but what about EM64T, or whatever the new Intel 
> hype is called?

They are identical, at least from a user-program perspective.  Intel
tries very hard to downplay this, since they've essentially reversed
positions, and have themselves cloned AMD's features.

Dave Brown


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread

* Re: [Caml-list] Support for 64bit Pentium?
  2005-11-30 18:49 ` [Caml-list] " David Brown
@ 2005-11-30 19:03   ` David Teller
  2005-11-30 19:21     ` Zoltan Podlovics
  2005-11-30 21:57   ` Brian Hurt
  1 sibling, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: David Teller @ 2005-11-30 19:03 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Ocaml

Haven't they actually licensed AMD's processor and renamed it ?

Cheers,
 David

On Wed, 2005-11-30 at 10:49 -0800, David Brown wrote:
> They are identical, at least from a user-program perspective.  Intel
> tries very hard to downplay this, since they've essentially reversed
> positions, and have themselves cloned AMD's features.
> 
> Dave Brown
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Caml-list mailing list. Subscription management:
> http://yquem.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/caml-list
> Archives: http://caml.inria.fr
> Beginner's list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ocaml_beginners
> Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs
-- 
Read, write and publish e-books,
 Free software, Open standards, Open source,
  The OpenBerg project -- http://www.openberg.org


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread

* Re: [Caml-list] Support for 64bit Pentium?
  2005-11-30 19:03   ` David Teller
@ 2005-11-30 19:21     ` Zoltan Podlovics
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread
From: Zoltan Podlovics @ 2005-11-30 19:21 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Ocaml

David Teller wrote:
 > Haven't they actually licensed AMD's processor and renamed it ?

You should check this:
http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=linux-kernel&m=107766481408468&w=2

Regards,
Zoltan


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread

* Re: [Caml-list] Support for 64bit Pentium?
  2005-11-30 18:49 ` [Caml-list] " David Brown
  2005-11-30 19:03   ` David Teller
@ 2005-11-30 21:57   ` Brian Hurt
  1 sibling, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread
From: Brian Hurt @ 2005-11-30 21:57 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: David Brown; +Cc: Alessandro Baretta, Ocaml



On Wed, 30 Nov 2005, David Brown wrote:

> On Wed, 2005-11-30 at 19:31 +0100, Alessandro Baretta wrote:
>> Shortly, most mainstream microprocessors will ship in 64 bit variants. I know
>> that ocamlopt supports AMD64, but what about EM64T, or whatever the new Intel
>> hype is called?
>
> They are identical, at least from a user-program perspective.  Intel
> tries very hard to downplay this, since they've essentially reversed
> positions, and have themselves cloned AMD's features.

True story: Intel screwed up when it shipped it's first copies of the 
documentation describing EMT64 technology.  See, the 64-bit Pentiums only 
have 36 physical address lines, while the Opterons have 40 (this makes a 
difference in the total amount of real memory that they can address).  The 
first generation of EMT64 manuals Intel shipped out said the chips had 40 
physical address bits.

Hey, Intel- you didn't quite finish filing the serial numbers off there...

Seriously, if it works on one, it'll work on the other (barring SSE3 
requirements).

Brian


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread

end of thread, other threads:[~2005-11-30 21:52 UTC | newest]

Thread overview: 5+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2005-11-30 18:31 Support for 64bit Pentium? Alessandro Baretta
2005-11-30 18:49 ` [Caml-list] " David Brown
2005-11-30 19:03   ` David Teller
2005-11-30 19:21     ` Zoltan Podlovics
2005-11-30 21:57   ` Brian Hurt

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).