Mastercam, Meyette, & RISC

[Multax]

Dear Mr. Meyette

You stated in a previous post that “To dispel your "rabid Intel Defender" myth, I would not recommend a P4 at this time. Many applications do not take advantage of the chipset at this time and most Developers (that I have heard from) are at this time putting more development into 64Bit RISC Apps. Which is a far better solution than even AMD's excellent offerings at this time. If I had one single recommendation to CNC Software besides the full Windows API, it would be to develop for 64Bit RISC architecture.” And a bug-free and complete Open GL implementation as well!

However, Intel’s IA64 CPU DOES not use RISC (Reduced Instruction Set Computing) architecture, it most definitely leans toward CISC (Complex Instruction Set Computing) in it’s complexity. Intel has chosen to completely abandon their 32-bit x86 architecture as their primer architecture with their co-development of the new EPIC (Explicitly Parallel Instruction Computing) architecture with HP. Consequently, Mr. Meyette, your desire for a RISC driven Mastercam on an IA64 platform cannot happen.

The paragraph that follows comes from a technically historical article that covers the major RISC players and their architectures.

-------------------------------------------

The simple elimination of Alpha on its own would have been a positive development for the remaining RISC players, IBM and Sun. It removes a potentially powerful competitor as well as provides an opportunity to pick up disgruntled Compaq customers. But Compaq’s course of action makes all Alpha IP, and potentially most of the accumulated Alpha design experience, available to Intel at little cost. The direct processor implementation know-how that the Alpha design group encompasses may be of marginal immediate value to the IA64 effort, because Alpha’s minimalist RISC and IA64's EPIC architectural and design philosophies are diametrically opposed.

-------------------------------------------

AMD’s Claw and Sledge Hammer CPU’s will prove themselves as the best architecture in terms of value and perhaps even in performance for Mastercam in comparison tests with Intel’s IA64 in 2002, and maybe in future years as well. AMD’s Hammer CPU’s use their version of Intel’s 32 bit architecture and their 64 bit, architecture will represent the FIRST ever development and deployment of a non-Intel extension to the X86 architecture. I doubt CNC Software can afford to develop and deploy their FIRST ever 64-bit program that can only run on Intel’s IA64 platform that in my opinion will cost between SIX and EIGHTEEN THOUSAND DOLLARS for a SINGLE cpu workstation upon introduction. Although I did not participate in the eighty’s era of high-end CAM that required a UNIX box that cost between twenty-five and fifty thousand dollars and UNIX OS expertise; I cannot imagine that CNC Software would FORCE its users to choose Intel only platforms.

Recent threads have shown that many Mastercam user’s budgets have difficulty with sub five-hundred dollar video cards! Mr. Jay freely admitted that many customers buy the cheapest X86 box they can find. For an informal poll, let every user on emastercam answer this question. If CNC Software deployed Mastercam 9 or 10 as a Windows XP IA64 only app, and my prediction of system cost comes true, how many freelance Mastercam programmers, small business owners, and employers can, will, or want to pay the above predicted price to change platforms? In addition, what if Intel decides to build RDRAM only IA64 chipsets, or worse yet, what if Intel decides to implement a proprietary memory technology that they control? Intel’s web site states that, “Itanium processors will feature 2 and 4 MB of L3 cache and 800 and 733 MHz frequency speeds at prices ranging from $1,177 to $4,227.” Consequently, ONE 800MHz Itanium CPU with 4 MB of L3 cache will COST $4,227 dollars and ONE 733MHz Itanium CPU with 2 MB of L3 cache will COST $1,177 dollars!

Mr. Meyette, you have also stated “Which RISC? Intel of course. You know it will be somewhat reasonably priced and will belong to the masses. DEC Alpha would be nice but I believe that chip will stay in the realm of servers and the like.” Mr. Meyette, do you believe the above stated Intel prices represent an acceptable price performance ratio? I do not believe that Mastercam users want an Intel only solution at an astronomical price? Do you?

Multax

 

 

[Webby]

This message was originally posted as part of another thread:

http://www.emastercam.com/ubb/Forum1/HTML/001220.html

I feel that it's been posted again in an attempt to bully James into response. Clearly James does not feel that the original message dignified a response.

I'm locking this thread.