> > You're being just plain silly. It takes about 5 minutes with the
> > manuals to realize just how little AXP and IA-64 have in common: one
> > is a classic superscalar out-of-order design, the other is just about
> > the opposite: a typical explicit-ILP architecture. What makes IA-64
> > great is the 8 years of statistical analysis of real-life software the
> > architecture design team spent fine-tuning the instruction set. What
> > makes AXP great is the clock rates Digital/Compaq manages to pump into
> > the beasts ;)
>
> What makes IA-64 great is the fact that it has not been deployed, so
> Intel can say whatever it pleases them.
>
> If you got REAL LIFE NUMBERS, based on REAL LIFE PERFORMANCE, then we
> can talk. Let's see how it does Quake, then we can talk.
This is rapidly becoming a stupid flame war so in the interest of keeping the
list on-topic, I won't be replying publically to this thread from now on. ;)
I *do* have some performance figures, as Intel has had the silicon for over
six months now, but, of course, Intel being Intel, their lawyers keep
everything under a wrap for now.
Pat.
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
