New itanium 64 bit Processor from Intel!!

[caveman]

Dear Readers I just saw a post at the tascam site.

One of the readers were concernced about the new Itanium 64 Bit chip thats coming out next year.

The adressed that no 32 bit hardware will support the new 64 bit processor, therefore all your existing 32 bit gear is thus not going to work, therefore buying a soundcard now is a waste of money if you want the new 64Bit processor.

Is this true? I personally do not believe it is. I believe that the 32Bit will be supported under the new 64 Bit Processor.

I checked at Intel and this is what they say about the 64 Bit Itanium:

\"Itanium processors will provide support across the design enterprise. Users will be assured that their investment in 32-bit applications and data is protected, thus protecting their investment and reducing total cost of ownership.\"

Doesnt this mean that your old 32 bit gear will be supported with the 64 bit platform, otherwise many people will have all this 32 bit gear as museum pieces.

Anyone share some light on this?
Its dark in here!

Caveman


[This message has been edited by caveman (edited 12-01-2001).]

[Kenn159]

I was wondering the same thing , if 32 bit hardware will be supported.
I posted the question on the tascam form but know one has answered.
All I can say that I know from what I have read is that the itanium will be optimized for 64 bit software ,and will still run 32 bit software[but not even as well as a pentium 4].
It will run 32 bit software but sinse its optimized for 64 bit it wont run the 32 bit software at a optimal level.

AMD has a competing processor called the sledgehammer that is more backward compatable and will run 32 and 64 equally well .
Although the 64 bit capability of the slegehammer potentially wont run as well as the Itanium.
AMD had to make some compremises in performance in the 64 bit realm in order to continue to support 32 bit.

[Kenn159]

But anyway aside from software support the question remains , does anyone know if the Itanium will support 32 bit hardware?
Are the going to stay with PCI slots or some other kind Like all AGP?

[Simon Ravn]

First of all, the change to 64-bit won\'t happen overnight. And I think they\'ll still be able to support 32-bit devices - afterall Intel have been working on a new PCI standard for some time - I don\'t remember the name, but the standard retains backward compatibility with 32-bit PCI cards, while moving ahead to 64-bit as well. You can make motherboards with both types of PCI slots. AGP is a standard that will only work with one device, so we can rule that one out too.

[Jamieh]

When the shift from ISA to PCI hardware cards happened, ISA cards were supported for many many years. I suspect the same will be true with any new hardware standard. Intel & Microsoft both are usually pretty concerned with maintaining backwards compatibility, at least to some degree.

[caveman]

Very Interesting

I agree on backward compatibility, the question just is how well these 32bit apps in software will run on the PC?

Also If I foresay used a Delta 1010 (32bit) and the Itanium 64 bit came out, I would have to stay with the 32 Bit Xp drivers right? Only if Delta 1010 was made for 64 bit could I use the 64 Bit XP OS?

This is a very interesting topic, as I plan to spend valuable resources to purchase and upgrade to my studio, but am a little puzzled on whether I sould wait till Soundcards will become 64 Bit ready, just sticking to what I have for now, and am happy with what I have, just running out of Ram and cannot upgrade more...

Thanks for the input, Its lighter in here now!

Caveman

[Jamieh]

Caveman, my personal opinion is that I wouldn\'t worry about the whole 64-bit thing when purchasing stuff right now. By the time it gets to be mainstream, you will probably want to upgrade your stuff for some other reason anyway.

It is going to take a while before the 64-bit stuff really gets going. I would suspect it will take a few years minimum. Then again, I\'m the guy who said the Internet would never take off, so take my advice as you will.... http://www.northernsounds.com/ubb/NonCGI/images/icons/smile.gif

[BOOKUMDANO]

Here\'s my point on what I said on the Tascam board when I brought up the topic of 64 bit machines....

If you already own a 32 bit card, and even perhaps are still running win98se with Giga...CONSIDER leaving your system as it is with no xp or giga 2.5 update (your system does work fine now doesn\'t it??) until the Itaniums and Clawhammers hit the market next summer.

Why? Because the world of audio and video will take a quantum leap in performance when those machines hit....new 64 bit cards will be released, new versions of all software (including Giga) will be released for 64 bit....yes, new technology happens all the time ..BUT, we are in a transition now that is sort of like last year when so many people ditched win98se to buy ME (ha ha ha..wasn\'t necessary) instead of waiting 12 more months for XP. Now..XP is here, Giga 2.5 is about here etc...but none of it is quite necessary yet. So..why not just WAIT a few more months for the 64 bit machines and 64 bit Win XP (which already is in beta) to hit the market RATHER than spending a bunch of headaches and time trying to tweak your 32 bit cards for Giga 2.5 and winxp/2000 drivers...a complete system you are guaranteed to not want any part of this time next year.

Yes, you can probably use your existing 32 bit card on the new 64 bit machines when they hit...but will you really want to do that when the time comes? Doubt it. You\'ll want to sell the 32 bit card and buy a 64 bit card to gain all the incredible performance, features, and throughput that will come with the new machines. So, slow down, relax, wait a little longer to upgrade.

Again, if you have a working system and you have not yet moved to WinXp, and have not yet found appropriate bug free drivers for your existing card, my opinion is to just keep your system running in whatever configuration it\'s in right now...and don\'t get so concerned with migrating to this intermediate, 32 bit WinXp/Giga 2.5 level.

I\'ve been building systems since way back in the 286 days. This isn\'t like the difference between a P-Pii-Piii-Piv...we\'re about to hit a gargantuan leap. Save your money and headaches till next year...go make music with what you\'ve already got. That\'s what I plan to do.

[pantonality]

There\'s absolutely no reason to consider Itanium 64 bit at this time for so many reasons it\'s hard to know where to start.

1. The highest resolution of any sound card is 24 bit. The reality is that 24 bits is greater than the resolution of the human ear. Can anyone truly say their ears can hear a dynamic range of 144 dB? Admittedly in processing rounding errors will occur with 32 bit fixed point processing, but floating point processing has essentially ended that argument. I am aware of arguments against 32 bit floating point processing, but the differences are minimal.

2. Itanium is a joke. It\'s first generation product with no application support. There isn\'t even a supported operating system, both Windows 64 and Linux 64 are Betas. When the 2nd generation is released the only applications to support it will be enterprise applications such as database, web, security and technical. It\'ll be at least 5 years before there are consumer applications on the 64 bit Intel platform.

I\'ve heard that running 32 bit applications on Itanium reduces a performance. You\'re better off planning for a P4 or Athlon for the next few years. There will be no hardware support on Itanium for a long time, when there is there will also be a lengthy transition.

What you guys may not know is that UNIX systems have been 64 bit for about a decade. The only reason Intel and Micro$oft are moving to the 64 bit platform is they want a piece of the lucrative enterprise market. As newcomers to the field they are going to have a tough time of it as they have little credibility. 64 bit will only make its way into the consumer realm when it\'s more expensive to keep the 32 bit stuff in production. The way I see it that\'s at least 5 years off.

Steve http://www.mp3.com/stevechandler (\"http://www.mp3.com/stevechandler\")
aka Ettienne http://www.mp3.com/ettienne (\"http://www.mp3.com/ettienne\")

[Jamieh]

Persoanlly I would be *SHOCKED* if 64-bit machines were mainstream or affordable any time soon.

WinXP is only going to be an \"interim\" solution if you consider 2 or 3 years to be an \"interim\" period.

[BOOKUMDANO]

I\'ll state my opinion again....64 bit Itanium machines running 64 bit WinXp are in the \"server\" market at this moment from the major PC makers. This has been going on in beta since last June. I believe AMD will be on schedule with the 64 bit clawhammers/sledgehammers releases in the next couple of quarters. Steinberg is working with AMD at this moment on 64 bit applications. I\'m sure that several card manufacturers are also testing 64 bit designs with the existing Itanium/64 bit Winxp machines that are already around...although none of them will breathe a word to you or me about it. Obviously this kind of talk would erode the existing new customer base for 32 bit stuff.

I stand behind my opinion that this will all filter to the desktop market by late summer...at prices similar to any new bunch of hardware releases.

I don\'t personally have anything against being on the cutting edge of audio hardware/software...but I don\'t see 32bit Winxp/giga 2.5 and the current development of 2000/xp 32 bit card drivers as cutting edge anything...it\'s only a sort of halfway thing like Windows Me was. And some folks are spending considerable time and money on these current upgrades, even as 64 bit looms in the near future.

I do plan on jumping onto the 64 bit edge as soon as I see enough compatible hardware/software showing up next summer. I\'m particularly interested in how many of Steinberg\'s products will be ported to 64 bit by then. I\'ll also watch hardware companies that seem to jump on new technology fastest like Echo, Motu, and Midiman/M audio. Perhaps even RME. Until then, I\'m keeping all my existing systems and using them to their current full advantage.

[Jamieh]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size=\"1\" face=\"Verdana, Arial\">quote:</font><HR>but I don\'t see 32bit Winxp/giga 2.5 and the current development of 2000/xp 32 bit card drivers as cutting edge anything...it\'s only a sort of halfway thing like Windows Me was.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I guess I disagree. Windows XP is CONSIDERABLY more stable than either Windows 98 or Windows ME. You are probably right in terms of performance--Windows XP performance probably won\'t be significantly better. But the potential is there for a XP version of Gigastudio that could run for long periods without having to be rebooted. While my Win 98 setup works OK, it still locks up reasonably frequently.

I think you are underestimating the time-frame for the 64-bit machine. In the last reports I read about it, it actually runs 32-bit stuff SLOWER than the 32-bit processors, so unless you are running stuff designed specifically for the 64-bit processor you are better off with the older processors. I think it will take quite a while before the 64-bit stuff is mainstream enough to be useful.

[Jacky]

386 to MMX to PIV. Change has been the only constant. You can prepare yourself for tomorrow but today\'s all you have. I wouldn\'t worry about 64 bit at all. Firstly the architecture is designed for servers, data warehouses and highly complex math calculations. Even a high end gamer does not need P4 to be realistic. MMX can handle the most demanding of game calculations. Now come to digital audio- even though sony and the likes are talking of 2MHZ freq on SACD lets face it we won\'t hear a jingle beyond 20KHZ. Every increase in bit depth will bring in the unwanted dilemma (screw the spelling) of dithering to a level audible to human ears. The next level of technology so far as audio goes is DVD audio at 24 bit and up to 192 KHZ. This is still an infant and will take about 3 years to mature and all this after DVD was first discussed in 1980.

64 bit architecture will not impact Music so far as musicians are concerned at least for the next 10 years.

[pantonality]

This is a good discussion of some of the fundemental issues in facing audio production on DAWs in the coming years. The way I see it there are three issues at hand.

Bit depth resolution
Sampling frequency
Rounding errors caused by 32 bit constrained data path.

Regarding bit depth resolution. The digital audio standard states that 1 bit = 6 dB. So 24 bits = 144 dB of dynamic range. This is significantly more than a human ear can stand without damage. It\'s also more than most analog equipment can support. Frankly the sheer amplifier power and speakers needed to reproduce that dynamic range are enormous (assuming 100 dB sensitivity greater than 4000 watts). There is nothing to be gained by having bit depth in excess of 24 bits in your sound card.

Sampling frequency, Rupert Neve used to do a demo at AES shows that in a double blind comparison demonstrated that about 33% of people could consistently hear the difference between a 15 kHz sine wave and a 15 kHz square wave. That indicates that the effect of a 45 kHz overtone is audible even if the actual tone is not. To my mind this indicates that 96 kHz sampling is potentially valuable. The systems to record and reproduce this level of fidelity exist now and 64 bit processing is not necessary or relevant to it.

Rounding errors occur when in digital signal processing a signal is truncated by the width of the data path. As someone who has sold Sonic Solutions I\'ve pitched that their 56 bit fixed point data processing is superior to 32 bit floating point processing. In reality I\'m glad I don\'t do that anymore because I\'m not convinced. Sonic systems sound great, but whether that\'s due to great programming, great digital conversion or their 56 bit data path, I just don\'t know. There are dsp cards that exist now (UAD-1, Protools dsp farm) that do a great job at a fraction of the price.

What I do know is that native processing is fine for EQ and compression, but falls short for reverb. This is a function of just not having the CPU cycles available to do the math. That\'s why I found the discussion of reverbs very interesting. This is where I see big room for improvement, but it may not be until we have a 20 GHz Pentium 9 that reverbs will sound truly realistic.

In my day job I sell Sun computers which have been 64 bit for a decade. Intel is not going after the consumer market with itanium, they want the lucrative enterprise market. I doubt we\'ll see itaniums in consumer systems until it\'s too expensive to keep making basic Pentiums. Jacky\'s probably right when he said that\'s 10 years off.

Steve http://www.mp3.com/stevechandler (\"http://www.mp3.com/stevechandler\")
aka Ettienne http://www.mp3.com/ettienne (\"http://www.mp3.com/ettienne\")

[caveman]

Thanks to all for making this topic so interesting.

I have truly been enligtened. Many different points of view, but professionaly stated.

I have come to the conclusion after studying this discussion to purchase another system, and not wait for better 64bit days. I believe that not all the true convenience is there when mixing DSP and REVERBS as the computers CPU/RAM restricts it, but instead of waiting just work around it, by recording and mixing fewer tracks at a time.

SometimesI believe we get sucked into the latest and greatest craze, which is a good thing too keep up to date with technology, but also to keep in mind to use what you have.

Thanks to all once again, and please shed more light on this

After all I am living in a cave!

Caveman

[This message has been edited by caveman (edited 12-07-2001).]

[seclusion]

I think we all fall into that trap of...
I can\'t do that till that works with that and then all of that\'ll be out dated cause that also does understand that at all..
Plug in the patch chord and play..
Don\'t waste time on \"I need that\".
brian