discussion forum


message

Name: J.
Date: February 14, 2001 at 13:06:32
Subject: Re: FOSTER CPUID
In Reply To: Re: FOSTER CPUID by
me too on February 14, 2001 at 12:34:28
Text: ||| I don't get it.
|||
||| Masking out the MSB of family=7=0111 would still be 0111=7.
||
|| Yes, but family 7 was already assigned to Itanium. Therefore, Pentium 4
|| had to be assigned family 0fh so that Windows NT would identify a family
|| 7 cpu (lower values were not acceptable for obvious reasons).
||
|| Check out the story at:
|| http://www.linux.com/hardware/newsitem.phtml?sid=1&aid=11457
|
| I still don't get it.
|
| Why didn't they assign family=7 to both, the Itanium and the P4, and then
| assign different extended family values to them?
|
| Oh, and does NT really work on an Itanium?
|
| No matter which way I look at it -- it's Intel's fault. Once again they
| went with a crappy solution, causing everyone else pain.
|

Windows NT has no knowledge of extended cpu family and masks out the most
significant bit of family field nibble. Whose fault is that?

J.


post a followup message
(Be nice... or be blocked. Be technical... or be erased.)

Name: optional link title:
eMail: optional link URL:
Subject: optional image URL:
  Insert line breaks by hand when only about one inch remains at the right side. Otherwise your message will be unreadable.
Text:
 

  Note: The above eMail form fields may look unaligned if you are using a browser other than Netscape Navigator version 3.0.


currently posted followup messages
(You may have to press the RELOAD button of your browser.)



main page