VOGONS

Common searches


32-Bit is dead

Topic actions

  • This topic is locked. You cannot reply or edit posts.

Reply 102 of 134, by Anders-

User metadata
Rank Member
Rank
Member
Errius wrote on 2021-09-16, 00:40:

I've never seen an Itanium system. The fatal weakness seems to have been its inability to run x86 software.

Supposedly intel developed an emulator so you could run 32bit x86 on the ia64 platform.
Thankfully they (intel) finally saw the light and adopted amd's x86-64 instead of ia64 for the xeons.

Måttfull och balanserad.

Reply 103 of 134, by canthearu

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie
Anders- wrote on 2021-09-16, 01:06:

Supposedly intel developed an emulator so you could run 32bit x86 on the ia64 platform.
Thankfully they (intel) finally saw the light and adopted amd's x86-64 instead of ia64 for the xeons.

The fatal flaws with ia64 was that it was stupidly expensive and exclusive. Like mind-bogglingly stupid expensive. Intel had all the money in the world to subsidize the changeover to a new architecture, but was too busy trying to profit take to get the platform cheap enough to get people invested in it.

Why not an make ia64 processor compatible with the lga 775 chipset?

"Enterprise" processors mostly end up pricing themselves out of the mass market, and their lack of adoption and revenue means R & D suffers, and mass market processors end up overtaking their performance.

Reply 104 of 134, by Jo22

User metadata
Rank l33t++
Rank
l33t++
canthearu wrote on 2021-09-16, 08:48:
The fatal flaws with ia64 was that it was stupidly expensive and exclusive. Like mind-bogglingly stupid expensive. Intel had all […]
Show full quote
Anders- wrote on 2021-09-16, 01:06:

Supposedly intel developed an emulator so you could run 32bit x86 on the ia64 platform.
Thankfully they (intel) finally saw the light and adopted amd's x86-64 instead of ia64 for the xeons.

The fatal flaws with ia64 was that it was stupidly expensive and exclusive. Like mind-bogglingly stupid expensive. Intel had all the money in the world to subsidize the changeover to a new architecture, but was too busy trying to profit take to get the platform cheap enough to get people invested in it.

Why not an make ia64 processor compatible with the lga 775 chipset?

"Enterprise" processors mostly end up pricing themselves out of the mass market, and their lack of adoption and revenue means R & D suffers, and mass market processors end up overtaking their performance.

Good question. Well, the whole capitalism concept is strange in itself.
If you make profit, someone else has to suffer.
It's like a shuffling around of resources.
It think that was the whole concept of 'Monopoly' originally - to sensitize people for this matter.

From what I've heard, some companies like Microsoft turn up both the heating and cooling in their data centers..

To waste power. Because, they have a contract with the city (?) that states that the company promises to have a consumption of a certain amount per month/per quarter/per year.

In return, the company gets a discount.
So in order to save money, they have to consume (waste!) more power. Silly isn't it?

Edit : Typos fixed.

"Time, it seems, doesn't flow. For some it's fast, for some it's slow.
In what to one race is no time at all, another race can rise and fall..." - The Minstrel

//My video channel//

Reply 105 of 134, by canthearu

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie
Jo22 wrote on 2021-09-16, 09:01:
Good question. Well, the whole capitalism concept is strange in itself. If you make profit, someone else has to suffer. It's l […]
Show full quote

Good question. Well, the whole capitalism concept is strange in itself.
If you make profit, someone else has to suffer.
It's like a shuffling around of resources.
It think that was the whole concept of 'Monopoly' originally - to sensitize people for this matter.

Those are philosophical questions I don't have the answers to, but I do know that you need wide adoption to pay for the extremely high costs of developing a modern microarch.

From what I've heard, some companies like Microsoft turn up both the heating and cooling in their data centers.. […]
Show full quote

From what I've heard, some companies like Microsoft turn up both the heating and cooling in their data centers..

To waste power. Because, they have a contract with the city (?) that states that the company promises to have a consumption of a certain amount per month/per quarter/per year.

In return, the company gets a discount.
So in order to safe money, they have consume (waste!) more power. Silly isn't it?

Seems silly on the face of it, but there would likely be a good reason for it. Probably to do with the need to keep the power grid stable and how baseload power production is slow to ramp up/down. If Microsoft didn't burn the power off, it would be up to the utilities to burn the excess power off to keep the grid at a stable voltage and frequency.

Reply 106 of 134, by red-ray

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie
Anders- wrote on 2021-09-16, 01:06:
Errius wrote on 2021-09-16, 00:40:

I've never seen an Itanium system. The fatal weakness seems to have been its inability to run x86 software.

Supposedly intel developed an emulator so you could run 32bit x86 on the ia64 platform.

There is no "Supposedly" about it they did and below you can see the 32-bit CPUZ x32 running on my system. There is one limitation though, kernel mode drivers have to be native as have the kernel mode drivers on x64 systems.

It's easy enough to build a native Itanium kernel driver and not much harder to build a native Itanium program.

file.php?id=119766

Attachments

  • RIA.png
    Filename
    RIA.png
    File size
    59.71 KiB
    Views
    789 views
    File comment
    Itanium system running the 32-bit x32/x86 CPUZ release
    File license
    Public domain

Reply 107 of 134, by Anders-

User metadata
Rank Member
Rank
Member
red-ray wrote on 2021-09-16, 13:59:
There is no "Supposedly" about it they did and below you can see the 32-bit CPUZ x32 running on my system. There is one limitati […]
Show full quote
Anders- wrote on 2021-09-16, 01:06:
Errius wrote on 2021-09-16, 00:40:

I've never seen an Itanium system. The fatal weakness seems to have been its inability to run x86 software.

Supposedly intel developed an emulator so you could run 32bit x86 on the ia64 platform.

There is no "Supposedly" about it they did and below you can see the 32-bit CPUZ x32 running on my system. There is one limitation though, kernel mode drivers have to be native as have the kernel mode drivers on x64 systems.

It's easy enough to build a native Itanium kernel driver and not much harder to build a native Itanium program.

file.php?id=119766

Well, there you go! Wasn't sure whether that thing actually took off or not.

I do seem to recall there was some promises about the emulated speed as well, it being close to native.
Have you run any benchmark too? I guess it's pretty much water under the bridge by now, but if they ended up with 1:1 (or thereabouts) performance I'd be a little impressed 😀

Måttfull och balanserad.

Reply 108 of 134, by red-ray

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie
Anders- wrote on 2021-09-16, 15:57:

Have you run any benchmark too? I guess it's pretty much water under the bridge by now, but if they ended up with 1:1 (or thereabouts) performance I'd be a little impressed 😀

I had not, but you got me wondering, looking at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Itanium then my CPUs are 30-Jun-2003 vintage so about the same time as Northwood.

Given the Northwood is almost double the clock of the Madison they are about the same and the native Itanium code is way faster

file.php?id=119785

Attachments

  • RIA+RP4.png
    Filename
    RIA+RP4.png
    File size
    131.83 KiB
    Views
    737 views
    File license
    Public domain

Reply 109 of 134, by Anders-

User metadata
Rank Member
Rank
Member
red-ray wrote on 2021-09-16, 19:41:
I had not, but you got me wondering, looking at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Itanium then my CPUs are 30-Jun-2003 vintage so ab […]
Show full quote
Anders- wrote on 2021-09-16, 15:57:

Have you run any benchmark too? I guess it's pretty much water under the bridge by now, but if they ended up with 1:1 (or thereabouts) performance I'd be a little impressed 😀

I had not, but you got me wondering, looking at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Itanium then my CPUs are 30-Jun-2003 vintage so about the same time as Northwood.

Given the Northwood is almost double the clock of the Madison they are about the same and the native Itanium code is way faster

file.php?id=119785

Not bad at all! Thanks for the test 😀
You wouldn't happen to have a 2.8GHz 32bit xeon around as well? It was released around the same time as your itanium2 and the northwood, and I guess (hope! 😀 ) it might put up a bigger fight than the P4.

Måttfull och balanserad.

Reply 110 of 134, by red-ray

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie
Anders- wrote on 2021-09-16, 20:09:

You wouldn't happen to have a 2.8GHz 32bit xeon around as well?

No, only 1.60GHz + 2.70GHz ones

file.php?id=119808

x32 on Alpha AXP does not fare as well

file.php?id=119809

Attachments

  • ALF.png
    Filename
    ALF.png
    File size
    63.78 KiB
    Views
    681 views
    File comment
    600MHz Alpha AXP
    File license
    Public domain
  • RXF+RXP.png
    Filename
    RXF+RXP.png
    File size
    187.67 KiB
    Views
    690 views
    File comment
    1.60GHz + 2.70GHz Xeons
    File license
    Public domain
Last edited by red-ray on 2021-09-17, 11:39. Edited 1 time in total.

Reply 111 of 134, by Anders-

User metadata
Rank Member
Rank
Member
red-ray wrote on 2021-09-17, 11:04:
No, only 1.60GHz + 2.70GHz ones […]
Show full quote
Anders- wrote on 2021-09-16, 20:09:

You wouldn't happen to have a 2.8GHz 32bit xeon around as well?

No, only 1.60GHz + 2.70GHz ones

file.php?id=119808

Awesome 😀 Looks like the 2.7 xeon is somewhat faster than the northwood, core for core. I didn't expect the P4 to hold up that well.
Either way, the itanium2 is clearly a beast in comparison.

Måttfull och balanserad.

Reply 112 of 134, by Jo22

User metadata
Rank l33t++
Rank
l33t++
zapbuzz wrote on 2021-09-15, 18:44:

linux 64bit wasn't written from scratch. Lots of it was ported from 32bit and some even just have a layer to run on 64bit.
Last I run linux 32bit on 64bit capable cpu I was surprised it actually ran more robustly but I won't mention the distros I will not turn people away from thei favs inc 64bit.
32bit software (or RISC) won't be dead anytime soon.

That's right, sadly. Older obsolete source code from the 32-Bit *nix era could cause trouble in the near future.
Maybe user Caluser2000 will be so kind and will provide some feedback for us then?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Year_2038_problem

The correct way of solving this issue would be to rewrite certain code to use 64-Bit pointers, I guess. Or 36-Bit pointers, at least.

Another, only slightly related "32-Bit" related, but noticeable issue lies within our beloved Win98SE, for example.
Technically, it would be possible to retrofit/backport the ExFAT file system for Win98SE.
Because, Win9x has an Installable File System (IFS) component.
Unfortunately, even if done so, Win98SE can't actually fully make use of ExFAT (and DVDs, too) because some system files cannot address more than 4GB (32-Bit).
Heck, it can't even handle individual files larger than 4GB, either. 🙁

So what's the matter? Big files are required for special cases only, mainly. But interesting special cases.
Like HDD images or ISO files. Or extracting highly-compressed RAR files.

For example, Virtual PC 4.x had a port for Windows 9x, too.
It works fine and is an enrichment for any hot-rod Win98 PC (Example:
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=B-1yBhcMWPM)

So you could run Windows 2000/XP or Linux in a VM on your Win98 machine. Or Vista/7, maybe.

Unfortunately, this will limit individual virtual HDDs to 4GB, which is very limiting.

Even with NTFS, provided through Paragons NTFS driver, the 4GB file limit in Win98 still persists.
And all that just because of that obsession for 32-Bit. If 36-Bit addresses/pointers were used, things would be way less limiting.
-The 32-Bit x86 versions of Windows 2k/XP/.. don't have this limitation, for example.
They can handle large files just fine (though not on FAT32 of course).

Some further links can be found in an older thread..
pendrive with exFAT in Win98

Edit: Correction. Some bits weren't quite right. 😅
Edit: Quote marked.

"Time, it seems, doesn't flow. For some it's fast, for some it's slow.
In what to one race is no time at all, another race can rise and fall..." - The Minstrel

//My video channel//

Reply 113 of 134, by Jo22

User metadata
Rank l33t++
Rank
l33t++

Quick update. The Chinese want (or rather, must) drop support for IPv4 (also 32-Bit) in the near future.
Dual-Stack solutions must be phased out, also.

https://www.theregister.com/2021/07/26/china_ … ck_ipv6_notice/

Not sure how this will impact new network routers, hubs and bridges and and DSL/cable modems.
- Considering, that most technology nowadays comes from China.

I guess they can't continue using mTCP or Arachne over there to go online?! 😉

"Time, it seems, doesn't flow. For some it's fast, for some it's slow.
In what to one race is no time at all, another race can rise and fall..." - The Minstrel

//My video channel//

Reply 114 of 134, by weedeewee

User metadata
Rank l33t
Rank
l33t
Jo22 wrote on 2021-09-17, 14:39:

Unfortunately, even if done so, Win98SE can't actually fully make use of ExFAT (and DVDs, too) because some system files cannot address more than 4GB (32-Bit).
Heck, it can't even handle individual files larger than 4GB, either. 🙁

🤦‍♂️
That is total bollocks. That's like saying an 8 bit computer can only handle files that are 256bytes max.

Right to repair is fundamental. You own it, you're allowed to fix it.
How To Ask Questions The Smart Way
Do not ask Why !
https://www.vogonswiki.com/index.php/Serial_port

Reply 115 of 134, by Anders-

User metadata
Rank Member
Rank
Member
Jo22 wrote on 2021-09-17, 14:58:
Quick update. The Chinese want (or rather, must) drop support for IPv4 (also 32-Bit) in the near future. Dual-Stack solutions mu […]
Show full quote

Quick update. The Chinese want (or rather, must) drop support for IPv4 (also 32-Bit) in the near future.
Dual-Stack solutions must be phased out, also.

https://www.theregister.com/2021/07/26/china_ … ck_ipv6_notice/

Not sure how this will impact new network routers, hubs and bridges and and DSL/cable modems.
- Considering, that most technology nowadays comes from China.

I guess they can't continue using mTCP or Arachne over there to go online?! 😉

IPv6 is completely evil (impossible to remember addresses, for once) and should be ditched in favour of returning to IPv4.
The v4 address space is plenty, we just need to decrease the population of the planet to fit the plan (we're overcrowded as it is anyways...)

While at it, we should also stop the IoT madness currently ongoing, that should free up another bunch of addresses.

Now get off my lawn 😁

Måttfull och balanserad.

Reply 116 of 134, by Jo22

User metadata
Rank l33t++
Rank
l33t++
weedeewee wrote on 2021-09-17, 15:17:
Jo22 wrote on 2021-09-17, 14:39:

Unfortunately, even if done so, Win98SE can't actually fully make use of ExFAT (and DVDs, too) because some system files cannot address more than 4GB (32-Bit).
Heck, it can't even handle individual files larger than 4GB, either. 🙁

🤦‍♂️
That is total bollocks. That's like saying an 8 bit computer can only handle files that are 256bytes max.

No, it's not, sorry. 😟
I'm always trying to be very diplomatic, but in this case, I can't be. 2+2≠5. 🙁

If we're talking about pointers and an address range as such,
then the ALU and address bus are most important.

Bank-switching and segment+offset trickery doesn't count.
An all 8-Bit CPU, as you may have thought of, does, in fact, only access/handle 256 bytes.
Sure, you can work around that issue and in the end work with larger files, but the limit still remains.

Most 8-Bit computers do have an 8-Bit data bus (data path), but a a higher bit address bus.
Like 8-Bit/16-Bit (6502, 8080, Z80; 64KB) or 8-Bit/20-Bit (8088, V20; 1024KB or 16 segments of 64KB each).

Internally, many 8-Bit CPUs also have an ALU capable of 16-Bit arithmetics.
Like the 8088 or Z80. Some also combine two 8-Bit ALU registers into one 16-Bit register (Z80, etc).

80386/80486 have both a 32-Bit data bus and a 32-Bit address bus. And a 32-Bit ALU.
Plus a MMU (Memory Management Unit).
https://electronicsdesk.com/80386-microprocessor.html

In 1995, the Pentium Pro was the first mainstream x86 processor to have an expanded 36-Bit address bus.

If Windows 98SE had used that 36-Bit extension, like by choosing a different set of system files during installation,
then it maybe would have had not this limitation.

Edit: Link added. Typo fixed. Another one fixed. Something added.

"Time, it seems, doesn't flow. For some it's fast, for some it's slow.
In what to one race is no time at all, another race can rise and fall..." - The Minstrel

//My video channel//

Reply 117 of 134, by weedeewee

User metadata
Rank l33t
Rank
l33t
Jo22 wrote on 2021-09-17, 16:40:

Edit: Link added. Typo fixed. Another one fixed.

You throw a lot of words at it, but no matter how you look at it, it's bollocks.

Too bad Rudolph Loew has passed. He would surely and easily show you the wrongness of your assumptions.

Right to repair is fundamental. You own it, you're allowed to fix it.
How To Ask Questions The Smart Way
Do not ask Why !
https://www.vogonswiki.com/index.php/Serial_port

Reply 118 of 134, by Jo22

User metadata
Rank l33t++
Rank
l33t++
weedeewee wrote on 2021-09-17, 17:03:
Jo22 wrote on 2021-09-17, 16:40:

Edit: Link added. Typo fixed. Another one fixed.

You throw a lot of words at it, but no matter how you look at it, it's bollocks.

Okay, let it put me this way..

Most 8-Bit processors can work with 16-Bit data.
- The 8088 also has a 20-Bit address bus (1024KB).
Let's think of that data as parcels, containing 64 bottles of Cola.
Now if you want to ship 1024 bottles of Cola, you can do that just fine.
- By sending 16 parcels one by one.
But you can unbox just one parcel (segment) at a time!

That's why COM files in DOS have a 64KB, limit too.
Without a method of selection, the processor is limited to one block of information.

The 286's Protected-Mode uses Selectors, thus.
The block (segments) are still 64KB wide at max, but the processor can switch between them.

Technically, though, even the 286 can handle 16-Bit (ALU, 64KB) at once only.

Edit: The 386 introduced a new MMU that could expand the block (segment) to the limits of the address range (4GB, 32-Bit).
So effectively, all addresses became directly addressable.
That's why old DOS games used "flat-mode" like there is no tommorow. 🙄

Edit: Small fix.

"Time, it seems, doesn't flow. For some it's fast, for some it's slow.
In what to one race is no time at all, another race can rise and fall..." - The Minstrel

//My video channel//

Reply 119 of 134, by weedeewee

User metadata
Rank l33t
Rank
l33t
Jo22 wrote on 2021-09-17, 17:16:
weedeewee wrote on 2021-09-17, 17:03:
Jo22 wrote on 2021-09-17, 16:40:

Edit: Link added. Typo fixed. Another one fixed.

You throw a lot of words at it, but no matter how you look at it, it's bollocks.

...
Okay, let it put me this way..

More words. All this proves is that 32 bit is alive and jo22 has died and been replaced by an unimaginative AI.

Right to repair is fundamental. You own it, you're allowed to fix it.
How To Ask Questions The Smart Way
Do not ask Why !
https://www.vogonswiki.com/index.php/Serial_port