Itanium

File: delidding intensifies.png (234KB, 882x758px) Image search: [Google]

234KB, 882x758px

>>60245708
EPIC was supposed to save us. We were all to be gods .. damn you AMD and your x86-64!

>>60245708
>Why does it exist?
You mean why DID it exist. The simple answer is that Intel saw a need for a new workstation/server architecture but that need was subsequently better filled by x86_64.

File: 1493849677968.jpg (75KB, 420x420px) Image search: [Google]

75KB, 420x420px

>170W housefires with no software

>>60245763
No, he means DOES.
http://www.pcworld.com/article/3169623/components-processors/intel-ships-latest-itanium-chip-called-kittson-but-grim-future-looms.html

File: dvpqjobamjybpzeb1vjt.jpg (49KB, 800x451px) Image search: [Google]

49KB, 800x451px

>>60245747
exactly this. amd stops intel from innovating. if it wasn't for fucking amd we would have moved on a decade ago to ia-64.

but no, poo-in-the-loo amd had to go out there and create a 64 bit extension to x86. fuck you amd. intel created x86. INTEL IS THE LEADER OF PROCESSORS.

>>60245943
what actually makes IA-64 better though? if Intel sold overclockable gaymen Itaniums to consumers would they give us gorillions more FPS and all that shit vs. i7s?

>>60245708
in the 90s people thought that hardware instruction schedulers (and to a lesser extent decoders) wouldn't scale, so hey why not try to statically schedule execution units in SW and have the hardware be more akin to a simple playback device.

It turns out they were wrong and that dynamic scheduling is still useful when dealing with nondeterministic memory stalls etc.

There were a lot of genuinely good ideas in Itanium though, including the protected register stack, huge visible register files, etc.

>>60246108
No, EPIC is horseshit.

>>60246108
The games would have to be made to work on the Itanium arch, and anything that wasn't made from the ground-up to do this would probably play terrible, as it's hardly anything special as far as optimization goes

>>60245943
dude STFU.

Intel handled this poorly. They should have had AMD in there (with Via, prob) to write the standard for Itanium.

Going it alone and hoping to corner the market completely was intel's plan.For AMD, extending x86 was pretty much the only option they had. Worst case, it'd be backwards compatible with 32 bit code and they'd bleed out slow, vs trying to create their own standard and fail. People forget just how terrible itainium was when it first launched. I think itianium 2 dropped like 10 months later.

Also, 32 bit processors were already bumping up against max ram limitations of 4GB (ignoring PAE) and titanic was expensive AF, even more so for home use.

>>60245708
This is what happens when Intel attempts innovation. Luckily they realized their mistake and are now exclusively trying their hand at things they can handle, i.e. die shrinks.

>>60245708
HP hit a wall with their venerable PA-RISC architecture and started a collaboration with Intel on a new architecture.
They decided on an interesting new design called EPIC, which is derived from VLIW. Under EPIC, compiler decides on parallelization instead of complicated on-board circuits which greatly simplifies the CPU and should result in better power consumption and less heat with equivalent or better performance.
Now, what happened was that everything that could went wrong. The first Itanium was several years late, suitable compiler was found to be harder to produce than expected, resulting performance didn't live up to the hype, and x86 emulation was downright terrible.
Most of the issues were fixed by Itanium 2, but the damage was already done. AMD64 came and stole the show.
Itanium is still great for Big Iron, but it's hardly anything exceptional, especially since Intel lost interest in it and HPE are cutting costs wherever they can.

Kek.

>>60245708
In the 80s the military had acquisition rules that required them to have multiple vendors for products to keep costs down by allowing competition.
This meant that Intel had to hand a license to AMD and several other companies to produce x86 hardware.

Intel of course lobbied to change those rules, and developed their Itanium chips with a new architecture to capitalize off of that. Once the new rules were in place Intel could shift to their new architecture and cut off AMD and Intel would be able to milk more money out of the military and everyone else with a platform they would have complete control of.

Then AMD released AMD64 and wrecked all of those plans. Intel flew into action bullying OEMs to keep AMD chips out of their systems while quietly producing their own cloned version. They knew what they were doing was illegal, but they also knew that billions of dollars in reparations to AMD down the road would be much smaller a loss than if they allowed AMD to capture market share.
Intel's gamble paid off, they got a slap on the wrist, the industry got a good decade with monopoly and very little progress, and its only recently that AMD has finally managed to recover from this and started to get back on their feet.