Windows XP 64bit based on AMD design?!

[c1tadel]

This is qute something as the new Windows 64bit XP is based on AMD 64bit architecture design.

 

http://money.cnn.com/2003/12/22/technology/techinvestor/hellweg/index.htm

 

What do you think?

[AWS]

WOW. I didn't see that one. All the rumors floating around were that MS would delay XP64 until Intel released their chips. It looks like an alliance between AMD and MS will build. This alliance could bring the mighty Intel to its knees.

[mutant]

I remember thinking about AMD taking over the market but didn't know it would come so fast :).

[c1tadel]

I would be interested to know if all the Windows XP 64 driver sets from all vendors come as 64bit ready. If so, it would be enough to convince to get an AMD 64 with the new XP. As for security, talk about taking buffer overflow out the door and into the bin.

 

It is good to see AMD has again gotten their act together since Athlon 1Ghz and beat Intel on desktop 64. The lower end AMD 64 way below $300 retail is another enticing factor. It makes economic sense for them as well.

[AWS]

I'm sure once MS gets the OS out the driver will come. Probably be the same timeline as when MS went with the certified driver program. It took some vendors a while to pass the test.

I remember when AMD entered the duallie market. It took over 6 months for C-Media and Creative to get a stable driver out. Blue screens every time you played 2 sounds at a time. I'd have an mp3 playing and if I got a new mail alert blue screen.

[PlenoJure]

IIRC there was a press anouncement by Microsoft detailing a few of the plans about 3 months ago, including a statement that they weren't going release 2 seprate 64-bit versions, if Intel wants their chips to be compatible with WinXP 64-bit then they'll have to use the AMD instruction set.

 

It seems the once great bond between the two giants is largly gone now.

[vbFace]

Nice to see AMD is going to be right there for the next generation stuff. I always loved my AMD chips...and with the price difference between AMD and Intel, how could anyone buy Intel? :)

[Isaac]

I've used AMD since my old AMD K-6 500mhz :D Stable as hell, I'd never think of going with Intel. One thing that bothers me about 64bit though, apparently a LOT of stuff isnt in XP-64bit that is in 32, such as internet connection sharing etc, how long would it be until all these are included? That's my only worry, other than that, I shall be getting my hands on a 64bit chip asap :D

[excaliber]

My guess is quite some time. Several years. These things are hard to change, and we all know how good the net is at adopting standards quickly :rolleyes:

[AWS]

Once the 64bit OS is gold eveything will work. When MS went from 16bit to 32 bit everything was in place. It took software developers a couple years to upgrade their software, but, you could still run 16 bit apps on the new OS.

[Isaac]

Once the 64bit OS is gold eveything will work. When MS went from 16bit to 32 bit everything was in place. It took software developers a couple years to upgrade their software' date=' but, you could still run 16 bit apps on the new OS.[/quote']

 

What I'm talking about is the features that come as part of widows, you look through the help files in XP, a lot of things say "Not available in 64-bit", shouldnt MS have made sure these were ALREADY available before they released the 64-bit version?

[handan2002]

Are there any other OSs that can run 64 bit processors? If there aren't, Microsoft really wouldn't mind too much if they released more bits and pieces of WinXP 64 because its in control of the market anyway.

[AWS]

Suse and Mandrake have a x86/64 port.

[handan2002]

oh, ok. Didn't know that.

 

Oh yea, by the way, from the previous posts, I sense that there are more people in support of AMD than Intel. I was just wondering why this was the case? What makes AMD stand out more than Intel?

[excaliber]

Lots of reasons. Firstly, everyone likes rooting for the underdog. They are the underdog (some would say) in this situation, Intel is far larger. AMD also has alot of fanboys, people who would sell their kid before admitting AMD is wrong.

 

AMD is usually (on the desktop market) cheaper than the equivalent Intel. And some lower AMD processors have been known to higher end Intel (famous one was the Duron and the Celeron, where much lowr Duron's outperformed higher Celeron)

 

AMD has the feature of (usually) leaving their chips able to be unlocked easily. This appeals to overclockers and enthusiasts.

 

Lastly, AMD chips usually run hotter than Intel, which is another reason why they are cheaper.

[handan2002]

kool! I've never actually liked AMD a lot (probably because I've been one of those Intel=Microsoft people). That little bit of insight into AMD was really great!

[AWS]

I use them both. AMD as desktop and Intel as servers.

[GavinO]

No kidding about AMD running hot! I raised the temp in a closed dorm room 10F with my Athlon Thunderbird over the course of just one day. Thank goodness for the thermal alarm in my fanbus.

[The Indian]

This is nice, but I see no reference to it at all on the microsoft site, the only things I could find were about Itanium and Win 64 XP. There is NO mention of AMD anywhere, if anyone has a link to it, please post it.

[Kitaiko]

man, what do you have against excaliber

 

[edit] ok the post is gone nevermind [/edit]

[Guest Converseahorse]

Hello boys and girls.

I've had my head in the sand for a while so forgive please if the following is a bit of a no brainer:

Am I to understand that the current release is for Intel users and the upcomming release is for the AMD crowd?

A few months back I went with a system sporting the AMD64, boy was I peeved when I saw the 64FX for it is DV I be mostly dealing with! Anyhow I took a gamble and figured the support would proliferate fairly rapidly, perhaps a year or so. The flip side of that was to go for a cheaper (32bit) solution for now and upgrade in 2-3yrs, getting a faster chip for even money. Ever since I've been nail biting wondering if I had made the right move. Anyone got an idea of a final release date; are we talking Summer '04 or '06!?

Also two things now concern me.

a) will the upgrade only be availible from an OEM

&

b) will the upgrade be an upgrade? That is to say as with the intel version will it only be available as a 'Full'' version?

 

Oh by the by my two cent (€ :p ) on AMD:

I had a 8088, a 186 (yes, one of the few), 286, 386 and then I woke up to the AMD K6 333...never looked back. I've used other Intel systems up to 3.2Ghz and well to put it mathematically AMD > Intel

 

 

Down with x86!!

[AWS]

The upgrade will be available to anyone. You can download the public beta of XP 64. Check out MS site.

There will be only one version of XP x86/64. Intel will have to follow AMD standards or be without an OS if they introduce something different.

There is already a 64bit XP, but, it is for the Intel Itanium. That is a true 64bit processor, not based on x86.

Not to worry your system will not become obsolete when the giant releases their x86/64 chip.

 

The final release will be sometime this year. My bet is you'll see XP x86/64 be released shortly after Intel releases their chip which will be second quarter this year.

Longhorn is the OS for 2006.