Itanium or Hammer?

[Multax]

Now that the 64 bit Windows XP OS, Intel’s Itanium CPU, and Mastercam’s V9 have arrived on the CAM scene. Can anyone present a WELL-REASONED, DOCUMENTED, and WELL WRITTEN argument against or in favor of the development of a 64 bit Mastercam that runs on Microsoft’s 64 bit Windows XP OS and Intel’s 64 bit Itanium CPU?

AMD’s Thunderbird and Palomino cpu’s have proven that they have a significant performance advantage over INTEL’S PIII and PIV cpu’s in a clock for clock comparison in most scientific, graphics, and compute intensive applications as a result of AMD’s superior FPU implementation and other architectural improvements in Intel’s X86 architecture.

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. Would CNC Software 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! Well, guess what INTEL LIED, the following prices came from Price Watch and represent current Itanium CPU pricing; 733mhz 2mb cache Itanium $3012 PC Nation Computer Warehouse Club 1-800-969-5255, Itanium i733 733mhz 2mb cache $3160 1-800- 969-5255, and a Itanium 800mhz 4mb cache $6726 800-969-5255

[ 10-17-2001: Message edited by: Multax ]

[ 10-17-2001: Message edited by: Multax ]

[Guest CNC Apps Guy 1]

........Here we go again...........

So, who's got an extra 50-60 hours to burn doing research? Any takers?????

[Bullines]

I have a lot on my plate so I'm not going to devote any time to this right now. However, I'll provide some background info for anyone wishing to enter this conversation.

A few months ago, I read a great article in Dr. Dobbs Journal (a computer science journal) concerning development for 64-bit CPUs and thankfully they've archived it on the web. Read it here. It outlines what the developers at CNC Software would have to worry about if they ported Mastercam to the 64-bit platform. It's not as simple as recompiling it with different options

Intel has posted a lot of info about the Itanium processor on the web. From here you can find many various whitepapers, technical documents and even I-64 assembly code samples and documentation that outline the new registers on the chip and instruction set additions.

A little bit of info about "The Hammer" CPU from AMD is listed on their website as a press release. But not many technical documents are available from them yet.

Well, hopefully this techie info will be helpful to some brave soul with a lot of time on their hands

[Keith Graydon]

Hi MultAx, Long time, no see. are you trolling again?

[Multax]

A lite presentation for the erudite reader!

 

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

........Here we go again...........

So, who's got an extra 50-60 hours to burn doing research? Any takers?????

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

 

Should not all instructors conduct research as part of their personal and professional development and as a responsibility to their students?

 

http://www.amd.com/us-en/Corporate/Virtual...15_3923,00.html Fred Weber Hammer Presentation

[ 10-17-2001: Message edited by: Multax ]

[bryan.davis]

who needs 50-60 hours?

firstly it needs to be understood exactly what mastercam is.

MasaterCAM is NOT the worlds best/fastest/most flexible CAM package!

Is windows the worlds best operating system..give me a break of course it is not!

And, contrary to popular believe the PC is not the worlds best computer either.

MasterCAM is a CAD/CAM package that runs on a computer system thats has only one redeaming feature and that that it is freely and cheaply available, using an operating system without any redeaming features other than most available software has been written to work with it.

In otherwords MasterCAM follows the crowd, if the crowd wanted faster computers, or better operating systems then we would all be using apple macs or sunsparcs.

In time its probably fair to say that the crowd will be using 64bit computers and OS', and come that time MasterCAM will more than likely convert in much the same way that MasterCAM is now a windows package rather than a MSDOS package.

[Bullines]

quote:

---

In time its probably fair to say that the crowd will be using 64bit computers and OS', and come that time MasterCAM will more than likely convert in much the same way that MasterCAM is now a windows package rather than a MSDOS package.

---

That kind of killed the need for a debate. Well said, though

[Guest CNC Apps Guy 1]

quote:

---

That kind of killed the need for a debate. Well said, though

---

I second that. The other thing I was thinking about, this really is not the forum to debate the technical merits of one CPU architecture over another. IMHO, there are NG's for that.

Trying to guess what is going to be the next big thing in computers from a hardware standpoint, is not really where I, as a customer of CNC Software would like them to put their resources and effort. I would rather them spend their time enhancing the software and making it work with TODAY'S computer hardware. (well, maybe tomorrows Video Cards but that's another issue) People are still not going to multiple CPU Systems in droves, barely even a trickle, I would expect to see that before I would expect to see 64-bit RISC systems. Many customers are still trudging around on their PII's. With that said, should CNC be looking at the future? Of course, should they be trying to guess what the future may bring h/w-wise? No, there's too many variables and from what I have seen/heard so far, there is still not a 64-bit RISC CPU for the masses chip on the horizon. The applications just aren't there for it either and most software developers are not rushing out to develop software for this chipset that may not even be viable for the masses(meaning CHEAP!!!! ) for another 5-6 years. X86 still has some life and at current pricing, even higher -end PC's are certainly affordable for the masses.

JM2C

[Multax]

Dear British Subject

“MasaterCAM is NOT the worlds best/fastest/most flexible CAM package!”

You heretic!!!

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

“Is windows the worlds best operatingsystem..give me a break of course it is not!

That maybe true, tell me though, have your blokes developed a superior OS!!!!!!!!!!!!

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

“if the crowd wanted faster computers, or better operating systems then we would all be using apple macs or sunsparcs.”

The CURRENT Mac OS uses the Berkeley UNIX kernel and the SunSparc cannot even begin to compete with the Alpha21264, PA-RISC8700, or POWER4 RISC cpu’s.

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

Dear Bullines

Can you address these questions?

1. Perhaps Microsoft’s 64 bit XP OS can run BOTH 32 bit and 64 bit software concurrently or sequentially???

2. Under what conditions would Mastercam need a gigabyte or more of RAM???

As an example, Bullines, take the most complex surfaced machined part you’ve ever programed and change the stepover parameter to .0001". With a stepover that small will not the following resources determine the overall compute time;

1. OS?

2. Quality of the code within Mastercam?

3. FPU capabilities?

4. CPU frequency?

5. Total amount of CPU resources allocated to Mastercam?

6. Total amount of RAM allocated to

Mastercam?

7. Memory bandwidth?

8. Memory latency?

9. Please add any factor I may have missed!

3. When will Mastercam have NURBS toolpath

generation capabilities?

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

Dear & V9 Enthusiast!

Tell us V9 Enthusiast, did you read Mr. Weber’s presentation???

“The other thing I was thinking about, this really is not the forum to debate the technical merits of one CPU architecture over another.”

1. Why not?

2. Who cares what you think!!!

Remember, your employer DOES not care

about what you think, they pay YOU for

what you KNOW and what you can DO to

enhance their profit margin!!!

3. When did you become Dave Thomson, Greg

McKay, or Jamie Mattison???

“there is still not a 64-bit RISC CPU for the masses chip on the horizon”

Very true, however, Intel has designed their Itanic with a totally new architecture called EPIC.

“The applications just aren't there for it either and most software developers are not rushing out to develop software for this chipset that may not even be viable for the masses(meaning CHEAP!!!! ) for another 5-6 years.”

1. A chipset provides electronic support for

a CPU

2. Very true, the Itanic does not qualify as

a CHEAP!!!! cpu.

“X86 still has some life and at current pricing, even higher -end PC's are certainly affordable for the masses.”

1. Mr. Weber’s presentation quite clearly demonstrates AMD’s faith in the X86 achitecture and his presentation also demonstrates their X86 enhancements at the 32 and 64 bit levels. Furthermore, AMD will allow the end user, that's you V9 enthusiast, the ability to buy a Hammer based system and run your 32 bit apps and upgrade to a 64 bit OS at your leisure.

2. The Hammer upon introduction will probably debut at a $1,000 or less per cpu.

3. Who knows & V9 Enthusiast, the Hammer just might provide such an awesome Mastercam seed increase, perhaps even YOU, an Intelphile, might buy one and sing it's praises

[ 10-17-2001: Message edited by: Multax ]

[Bullines]

Looks like I'm getting dragged into this. Why me?

quote:

---

Dear Bullines

Can you address these questions?

1. Perhaps Microsoft’s 64 bit XP OS can run BOTH 32 bit and 64 bit software concurrently or sequentially???

2. Under what conditions would Mastercam need a gigabyte or more of RAM???

---

1. Since Microsoft does not employ me, I cannot answer this with 100% accuracy. However, in the past Microsoft has always championed backward compatibility. So will it run 32 and 64-bit apps sequentially? Why not? Maybe your definition of sequentially is different from mine. Will it run 32 and 64-bit apps concurrently? I would think so, unless Microsoft's plans change. Recall the command prompt in Windows 9x (thanks to an over-patched kernel) and Windows 2000's compatibility modes. Of course, the way to handle this situation is through the use of a virtual machine to handle 32-bit apps. Because let's face it, an integer value on a 32-bit platform is not stored the same as an integer on a 64-bit platform

2. The exact point at which Mastercam would need 1GB+ of RAM would be the point at which the Mastercam executable (Mill, Lathe, Wire, Design or Router) occupied 1GB+ of RAM upon launch. Obviously you would have to take into account RAM that is currently used and the data that can be swapped out to the page file. Of course I'm neglecting the overall performace of the computer. The amount of RAM, in essence, is a personal preference. It all depends on the amount of virtual memory activity you can tolerate

[Charles Davis]

Regarding the comment, "Mastercam follows the crowd".

Isn't that just another way of saying Mastercam is Market driven? Market driven is a good thing; giving people what they need.

Thinking about what I want in ANY computer or software application is ease of use, functionality, ability to interface with other products/applications, and reasonable cost.

I think that's what most people want, and the reason why there is a crowd in the first place!

[Bullines]

quote:

---

Regarding the comment, "Mastercam follows the crowd".

Isn't that just another way of saying Mastercam is Market driven? Market driven is a good thing; giving people what they need.

---

Excellent point, Charles. I think most Mastercam users are more concerned about a good price/performace/value ratio to use the software to turn a profit, rather than bleeding-edge technology and "geek factors". I'm realizing the manufacturing industry is a different breed

[bryan.davis]

quote:

---

Regarding the comment, "Mastercam follows the crowd".

Isn't that just another way of saying Mastercam is Market driven? Market driven is a good thing; giving people what they need.

---

yes, but more specific, most products are market driven, some are driven by the specialist high-power platform market, MasterCAM is driven by the crowd that want cheap and easilly accessable systems like the PC.

 

Dear ex-colonialist who needs a reality check

quote:

---

“MasaterCAM is NOT the worlds best/fastest/most flexible CAM package!”

You heretic!!!

---

so burn me!

dare I mention Delcam?, but thats not my argument...

..given an unlimited budget and projects that justified such an exercise what would be the CAM package and platform that the informed engineer would opt for?

I dont know the answer to this as its not an exercise Ive needed to do, but I would be very suprised if the end result was MasterCAM, infact Ive doubts that it would be any PC based package.

 

quote:

---

The CURRENT Mac OS uses the Berkeley UNIX kernel and the SunSparc cannot even begin to compete with the Alpha21264, PA-RISC8700, or POWER4 RISC cpu’s.

---

Is that a fact, well you again are ignoring the point, that is unless you are prepared to stand up and say that the PC is the worlds best platform.

I am somewhat relieved that you may concede the shortcommings of windows, maybe 'our guys' currently dont have anything better, but we will always be able to say we had the first as to others well, there have always been better OS than windows!

[ 10-17-2001: Message edited by: bryan.davis ]

[Multax]

“Dear ex-colonialist who needs a reality check”

quote:

“MasaterCAM is NOT the worlds best/fastest/ most flexible CAM package!”

You heretic!!!

“so burn me!”

 

Chill out wanker! Don’t you have a sense of humor???

“dare I mention Delcam?, but that’s not my argument... given an unlimited budget and projects that justified such an exercise what would be the CAM package and platform that the informed engineer would opt for? I don’t know the answer to this as its not an exercise I’ve needed to do, but I would be very surprised if the end result was MasterCAM, in fact I’ve doubts that it would be any PC based package.”

Delcam, an excellent CAM package, however, we have UG and NCCS. Both of these CAM packages have P.C. based versions and can calculate true simultaneous FIVE-AXIS toolpaths.

quote:

The CURRENT Mac OS uses the Berkeley UNIX kernel and the SunSparc cannot even begin to compete with the Alpha21264, PA-RISC8700, or POWER4 RISC cpu’s.

“Is that a fact, well you again are ignoring the point, that is unless you are prepared to stand up and say that the PC is the worlds best platform.”

Mac’s and SparcStations qualify as “P.C.’s” Again, have your blokes developed anything better that the X86 Windows based P.C.???

“I am somewhat relieved that you may concede the shortcommings of windows, maybe 'our guys' currently don’t have anything better, but we will always be able to say we had the first as to others well, there have always been better OS than windows!”

[ 10-17-2001: Message edited by: Multax ]

[Bullines]

quote:

---

Chill out wanker! Don’t you have a sense of humor???

---

I'm all for heated debates and conversation, but let's not resort to name-calling and direct insults.

[Multax]

quote:

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

Chill out wanker! Don’t you have a sense of humor???

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

"I'm all for heated debates and conversation, but let's not resort to name-calling and direct insults."

My dictionary does not have the word "wanker" in it. Please give me a short and concise reading of it's current meaning and useage.

[ 10-17-2001: Message edited by: Multax ]

[Bullines]

Multax,

Here's the definition for wanker.

[JAMMAN]

Definition is unclear, but for spelling Microsoft Word recommends: winker, swanker, wander, walker and wincer for replacements.

[marco]

xxxx·er [wángkr ] (plural xxxx·ers) noun U.K. Australia, New Zealand (taboo)

1. a taboo term for somebody who xxxxes

2. a taboo term for an unpleasant, self-indulgent, pretentious, or arrogant person

 

[Mid-20th century]

[Allan Brown]

quote:

---

My dictionary does not have the word "wanker" in it. Please give me a short and concise reading of it's current meaning and useage.

---

My dictionary doesn't have the word "useage" in it. Multax - Your posts make you a target for this type of pettiness.

e.g.

quote:

---

Can anyone present a WELL-REASONED, DOCUMENTED, and WELL WRITTEN

---

[Webby]

Hey Bullines - Dictionary.com says the word in question is British Vulgar Slang.

The Forum Rules that we've all agreed to during Registration read:

quote:

---

You agree, through your use of this service, that you will not use this BB to post any material which is knowingly false and/or defamatory, inaccurate, abusive, vulgar, hateful, harassing, obscene, profane, sexually oriented, threatening, invasive of a person's privacy, or otherwise in violation of any law.

---

Anyone notice the word vulgar there?

bryan.davis - Do you want any actions taken?

[ 10-18-2001: Message edited by: Webmaster ]

[Guest CNC Apps Guy 1]

quote:

---

1. A chipset provides electronic support for a CPU.

---

Excuse my slip in terminology.

AMD...... I've had an Athlon 1.2 now for at least a month. I'm not that impressed. It's performance is better than my PIII-800, but not by the magnitude I expected according to your hype. Would I buy an AMD for my home? Probably not.

quote:

---

....an Intelphile..

---

Whatever.

quote:

---

3. When did you become Dave Thomson, Greg McKay, or Jamie Mattison???

---

......and you asked this because?????? If I were a moderator in this forum, you would have been banned for your continued callous disregard for the rules in this forum. I'm for free speech and all, you certainly have a right to express your opinion BUT not to the detriment or others. Statements like this,

quote:

---

Chill out wanker! Don’t you have a sense of humor???

---

are completely inappropriate and should get you banned. So far, if memory serves me correctly you've contributed almost nothing positive to this group (the exception being a topic you started about Work Ethic or something like that) but it was completely unrelated to Mastercam so it should not count. So, do us all a favor and MAKE TROUBLE SOMEWHERE ELSE!!!. With all the NG's ou t there there must at least one that would suit you better than here.

Later,

[Multax]

Dear Bryan Davis

As you read this post understand that Multax failed to conduct the necessary research to determine the full implications of the word in question. Bryan Davis, if Multax has caused you any anger, discomfort, hurt, indignation, pain, or if Multax has defamed you in any way, for that Multax apologizes to you, and to you alone.

Multax used the word “wanker” without a full understanding of it’s connotation and denotation. Bryan Davis, Multax did not use the appropriate word for the occasion and Multax certainly did not mean to impute your personal reputation or integrity with definition no. 1. a taboo term for somebody who xxxxes or no.2. unpleasant, self-indulgent, pretentious, or arrogant person.

posted 09-11-2001 02:55 PM by Bryan Davis

"It's amazing that the country that saved the world from the darkness of the Nazi's should be the object of this senseless and pointless hatred." As an e[E]nglish national I am absolutely stunned that you could write this.

“Whilst its probably true that without the USA entering the war the outcome would have been much different, its also true that the England stood all but alone against Nazi Germany, . . .

NOT true, President Roosevelt addressed a joint session of Congress AT GREAT POLITICAL RISK and stated with a slight paraphrase; we can not and we will not allow Britain to fall. After this address, President Roosevelt instituted the “Lend Lease” program to ship arms, munitions, planes, trucks, and other supplies. I could be in error, however, I believe that the U.S. commenced it’s logistical support of England in 1940. After the war the U.S. FED both ENGLAND and GERMANY and prevented MASS starvation in both countries. 1948 brought the Marshall Plan and America’s rebuilding of Europe.

and it took Japan, bombing Pearl Harbour to persuade the (American people) USA to abandon its policy of isolationism.”

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

“I am very sorry to say that I cant help but feel that its this kind of arrogance that makes your nation such a target.”

Bryan Davis, I should have called you on this last statement in September. However, NOW I shall take the opportunity to do so. Your above statement violates every tenet of decency and civilization. It is hateful in the extreme and borders on evil. You had the temerity to spew these vile words on the very day that six thousand people, mostly Americans, along with citizens from eighty other countries suffered the horrors of incineration in an office building. How do you sleep at night? God only knows.

I DEFY anyone to show me how this statement DOES NOT transgress the letter and spirit of the rule that governs speech on this forum. Bryan Davis, I hereby empathically state that your scurrilous statement knowingly violated the agreement not to use this “BB to post any material which is. . . defamatory, inaccurate, abusive, vulgar, hateful, harassing, obscene, profane”.

Multax did find your WORDS unpleasant, self-indulgent, pretentious, and arrogant in your responses and criticism of the United States in relation to the WTC terrorist attack. Multax also found the WORDS and IDEAS you used to express your criticism of Windows as the usual pompous sniping of the UGLY EUROPEAN.

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

Dear Webmaster and Dave Thompson

“You agree, through your use of this service, that you will not use this BB to post any material which is knowingly false and/or defamatory, inaccurate, abusive, vulgar, hateful, harassing, obscene, profane, sexually oriented, threatening, invasive of a person's privacy, or otherwise in violation of any law.”

Multax used the word, “wanker”, apparently a vulgar term as Marco has demonstrated. Multax cannot and will not offer any Clintonisque excuses for the violation of the above stated rules. However, Multax finds it interesting that the “WEBMASTER” has trotted out the RULES in this case. Punish Multax as you will, but remember, more than a few of your other members have VIOLATED the above stated rules. IF you punish Multax, and FAIL to punish ALL former violators of the above stated rules in a like manner, then all of you, Bullines, Dave Thomson, Greg McKay, Jamie Mattison, and the WEBMASTER have proven themselves to lack the temperament, judgement, and objectivity to properly administer and moderate emastercam.com.

[ 10-18-2001: Message edited by: Multax ]

[Bullines]

Multax used the word, “wanker”, apparently a vulgar term as Marco has demonstrated. Multax cannot and will not offer any Clintonisque excuses for the violation of the above stated rules. However, Multax finds it interesting that the “WEBMASTER” has trotted out the RULES in this case. Punish Multax as you will, but remember, more than a few of your other members have VIOLATED the above stated rules. IF you punish Multax, and FAIL to punish ALL former violators of the above stated rules in a like manner, then all of you, Bullines, Dave Thomson, Greg McKay, Jamie Mattison, and the WEBMASTER have proven themselves to lack the temperament, judgement, and objectivity to properly administer and moderate emastercam.com.

I believe that the administrators and moderators of this forum have treated this situation in the same manner as others in the past. When a situation such as this was encountered, the matter was discussed with the forum member(s) and warnings of any violation of the rules were issued. I don't think we've had to ban any IPs yet. For a public forum such as ours, that is truly rare.

I believe I warned you:

quote:

---

I'm all for heated debates and conversation, but let's not resort to name-calling and direct insults.

---

We then discussed the problem. I began:

quote:

---

Multax,

Here's the definition for

wanker

.

---

Marco reinforced my argument with a definition from another source:

quote:

---

xxxx·er [wángkr ] (plural xxxx·ers) noun U.K. Australia, New Zealand (taboo)

1. a taboo term for somebody who xxxxes

2. a taboo term for an unpleasant, self-indulgent, pretentious, or arrogant person

---

And finally, the Webmaster quoted from the forum's guidelines to illustrate what had been violated. It seems like a fair process to me. Other members have been unfortunate enough to violate these rules. The very few who have (we have great forum members!) were dealt with in a similar fashion. But none of them have acted the way that you have. They conducted themselved, plain and simply, like adults by accepting the blame and rectifying the situation. Making yourself out to be a martyr is not helping your case, Multax.

[kathy]

Multax

15 yard penalty - Bad Attitude

Kathy