🚀 go-pugleaf

nwe@ix.netcom.com(Sean C Peters) wrote:

>In <31ad9c57.10416878@news-win.rinet.ru> minister@rinet.ru (Dmitriy
>Veremeev) writes: 
>>
>>wally@nirvana.jsc.nasa.gov (Walter B Kulecz PhD) wrote:
>>
>>>In article <31ab1f2f.4414157@news-win.rinet.ru>, minister@rinet.ru
>says...
>>>>P5-200) and don't  bother about MMX AT ALL. Because the software
>>>>support for MMX is MUCH more important than hardware implementation.
>>>>Just like P5's and P6's new operands - they probably could speed up
>>>>some applications, but nobody use them just not to do their code not
>>>>capable of running on 486, P5 clones or something else. So even when
>>>>MMX processors will be available, you won't be able to use their
>>>>features - software companies shouldn't make software that wont work
>>>>on 99% processors. It's a waste of money for them. And this
>situation
>>>>is going to continue for a couple of years. IMHO, of course.
>>>>Sorry for poor English.
>>>
>>>I have to disagee here.  I expect the MMX to catch on and quickly
>lead to a 
>>>situation analogous to floating point coprocessors.  An emulator
>library is 
>>>written to support "old" hardware without MMX so software
>auotmatically detects 
>>>MMX and uses it, otherwise it calls the library code to accomplish
>the same 
>>>result (although slower).  
>>>
>>>Anyone who runs real calculations (fft's, matrix algebra, etc)
>doesn't consider 
>>>a machine without FP hardware (this has been true since the XT), so
>people 
>>>serious about multimedia won't consider machine without MMX asuming
>the 
>>>hardware actually delivers the improvements promised.  I expect it
>will.
>>>
>>>Don't forget, AMD has licensed this from Intel already, Cyrix will
>have to or 
>>>else modify its existing extensions to be compatable.
>>>
>>
>>And, still there are very many programs that better use FPU, but can't
>>just for case of CPU w/o FPU or with incompatible one.. So the same
>>will be with MMX - there will be 5-7 applications supported it -
>>probably XING, maybe something like Photoshop, etc... But only a few!
>>
>>BYE.
>>Yours, 
>>LodeRunner. E-mail: minister@rinet.ru
>
>Unfortunatetly this whole disussion may be irrelevant as TI just
>introduced a new technology.  The 0.18 Micron process.  It packs an
>incredible 125 million transistors on one chip, making it possible to
>put several boards, video, audio, hard drive, ram, etc. on to a single
>chip.  I will post the newsfeed following.
>

Well, it's not SO exciting since AFAIK PPro uses 0.25 (or will be
using in the  near future) So that TI tech. is ~30% "better".
Or did I understand it in a wrong way?
BYE.
Yours, 
LodeRunner (Dmitry Veremeev). E-mail: minister@rinet.ru