[geeks] Itanium 32 bit performace.... hahahaha

[Jonathan C. Patschke]

On Tue, 9 Dec 2003, Francisco Javier Mesa-Martinez wrote:

> It is a tough argument to sell if you want to force 90%+ of the software
> out there to run in emulation mode. Why?

It worked for Apple.  Although, that's not an entirely fair comparison,
since no one was making 68k Macintoshes other than Apple.  However, to
their credit, they got the 68030 emulation working -excellently-, even
if it didn't emulate an FPU.  Apple's customers had to deal with a round
of computers (PowerMacintosh x100) that were -slower- than the previous
generation when running the current software, with the promise that
future software would run better than ever, and Apple made good on that
promise.

The PC world can't even claim speed anymore.  I used a Pentium 4 2.3GHz
system yesterday.  I was -stunned- how slowly it ran Windows XP.  It
wasn't the memory (512MB) or the video (GeForce 2) or the disk
(ATA-133).  It's just that the architecture has finally reached the
limits of its usefulness and that the P4 isn't nearly as ballsy as
Intel's previous offerings.  Why most PC users can't see this is beyond
me.  I mean, my (now dead) Athlon 1100 system running Windows 2000 was,
if not generally faster, certainly more responsive than the 2.3GHz pile
of junk.

Either XP is a lot, lot, lot more bloated than I gave it credit for, or
there's only an incrementfl increase in speed between my Athlon (almost
three years old) and a Pentium 4 system built this year.  Either way,
you'd think customers would be -screaming- for change, rather than
whining that their favorite games will run slower on the next crop of
Itaniums.

--
Jonathan Patschke  ) "Earth works.  That's proof positive that Mother
Elgin, TX         (   Nature isn't a suit."            --Dave McGuire