intel core 2 duo

[Phil Meyer]

Tony Nelson wrote:
> At 9:47 PM -0600 9/28/06, Phil Meyer wrote:
>   
>> Louis Garcia wrote:
>>     
>>> Just got my hands on a laptop with this chip. Any difference installing
>>> i386 or x86_64 version of fedora? I've heard fedora had a problem with
>>> this new chip?
>>>
>>> -Louis
>>>
>>>
>>>       
>> There is NO advantage installing a 64 bit OS on a 32 bit CPU that has
>> extended features to EMULATE AMD 64 bit instructions. ...
>>     
>
> Proof?  Examples?  Documentation that the Intel Core 2 Duo does not have 64
> bit ALUs and data paths?
>   
Documentation is plentiful, but 'proof' does not exist for anything in 
this world.  Lets just call it documentation.

intel dead ended Pentium 4 due to heat and performance characteristics
intel used the good heat and performance characteristics of the Pentium 
M (which is an evolution of the Pentium 3) and moved it to 65nm process.
In order to obfuscate the origins of the processor, the Pentium name was 
dropped altogether and a new marketing series was developed for the 
newest evolution of the Pentium 3 called Core.

You might recall that the Pentium 3, as well as the Pentium M are 32bit.
You may also recall the years spent developing Itanium, a true 64bit 
platform.
How long in development from the EOF of Pentium 4 and the release of the 
'Core' CPUs?

So please, lets examine how intel gets 64bit instructions to run on what 
is essentially a Pentium M architecture.

ASSUMPTIONS:
There are still some bright folks at intel.
intel is marketing driven, not market driven -- see: 'viiv' and 'centrino'

Let's start our look here:
http://arstechnica.com/articles/paedia/cpu/core.ars
---
 From the article:
Intel's approach to multicore is not about keeping each individual 
core's on-die footprint down by throwing out dynamic execution hardware, 
but about keeping each core's power consumption down and its efficiency 
up. In this sense, Intel's strategy is fundamentally process-based, 
which is why I said it's "very 'Intel.'" Intel will rely not on the 
microarchitectural equivalent of a crash diet, but on Moore's Law to 
enable more cores to fit onto each die. It seems that from Intel's 
perspective, there's no need to start throwing hardware overboard in 
order to keep the core's size down, because core sizes will shrink as 
transistor sizes shrink.
---
My Comment:
This is the principle technical advantage that intel has over every 
other chip manufacturer.  They  can, do, and will shrink process faster 
than anyone.  They will be shrinking again in 2007, at the relative 
'same time' as AMD is just getting down to 65nm.
---
 From the article:
Core's designers took everything that has already been proven to work 
and added more of it, along with a few new tricks and tweaks that extend 
some tried-and-true ideas into different areas.
---

Now lets look at some of the documentation from intel.
http://www.intel.com/technology/magazine/computing/core-architecture-0306.htm

Please notice the complete lack of any and all marketing data calling 
this a 64bit architecture.
And none here:
http://www.intel.com/products/processor/coreduo/index.htm
And no mention of any 64bit goodness anywhere here either:
http://www.intel.com/products/processor/core2duo/index.htm
But wait, there is a 'hint' here:
http://www.intel.com/products/processor/core2duo/specifications.htm
Following the 'hint' we get to here:
http://www.intel.com/technology/64bitextensions/index.htm
Now we are getting somewhere, right?
Oops, no mention of laptops??  How does a consumer know if a new core 2 
duo laptop is 64bit OS capable?

And now, oh reader, I leave it to you to examine any and all of the 
intel reference documentation on that page to clarify this issue.

The real question is:  Does the addition of EM64T make this a 64bit 
platform?
My conclusion: NO.

And further, does every core CPU model feature EM64T, and how can you tell?
If not, then what does EM64T on Core really mean?

You decide.