Prev: Template bits for faster decode
Next: The next french "supercomputer" will have both CPUs and GPUs
From: Anton Ertl on 17 Apr 2008 14:12
"Paul A. Clayton" <paaronclayton(a)earthlink.net> writes:
>On Apr 17, 8:07 am, an...(a)mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl)
>wrote:
>> Andre Majorel <che...(a)halliburton.com> writes:
>> >What is IPF ?
>>
>> A marketing name of IA-64. It fell out of use (but apparently not
>> completely) after it flopped.
>
>Are you sure? A quick look at some Intel documentation three
>names seem to be used: Itanium Processor Family, Itanium
>Architecture, and Itanium Processor.

Sure Intel uses the names marketing has decreed until marketing
decrees a new name. But everybody else either says IA-64 (if they
know what an architecture is), or Itanium, or Itanium 2, or the code
names.

> (Wikipedia points to
>Itanium Architecture as the name of the Architecture, and the
>more recent documents seem to use that name.)

Then I guess that Intel marketing has officially decreed "Itanium
Architecture" to be the current name of IA-64, and any mentions of IPF
on Intel documents are just signs of their age.

BTW, Intel marketing really has a breath-taking pace in generating new
marketing names; one has a hard time of keeping track of all of them.
Consider the x86-64 architecture:

AMD needed just two names to arrive at the right one:

x86-64 (make it company-independent at the start)
AMD64 (now that people accept it, we can say who invented it)

Intel then came and invented many more names:

IA32e (well, we can't call it IA-64, and let's not emphasize that it
is 64-bits; we want people to use IA-64)
EM64T (AMD64 for dyslexics)
Intel 64 (no longer need to pretend IA-64 is taking over, nobody
believes that anymore; so we can come out and announce this
as our main 64-bit architecture; and hey, it parallels AMD64
naming)

I may have missed one or the other.

>I am ignorant of how
>the Architecture is named in advertising, the press, and
>customers; but I do prefer to use correct and current
>names.

I don't think it makes sense to fallow the whims of marketing in
technical discussions. It's confusing and you are never done. So
just stick with IA-64 and x86-64.

- anton
--
M. Anton Ertl Some things have to be seen to be believed
anton(a)mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at Most things have to be believed to be seen
http://www.complang.tuwien.ac.at/anton/home.html
From: Alex Colvin on 17 Apr 2008 21:04
>I may have missed one or the other.

what happened to VIIV or ViiV or whatever?

wasn't that a branding for x(LXXXVI)-(LXVI)?
--
mac the na�f
 | 
Pages: 1
Prev: Template bits for faster decode
Next: The next french "supercomputer" will have both CPUs and GPUs