x86

[I_Smell_Tuna]

I have an Athlon 64 CPU, is this an x86 CPU? If so will I be ok in learning assembly language for an x86 Intel CPU?

[R.a.B.B.i.T]

Yes.

[Mangix]

x86 means Intel Microproccessors(according to webopedia.com). sooooooo any Intel Processor is x86.

[R.a.B.B.i.T]

No it isn't.

x86 means any CPU/ALU running off of an 86x86 chipset, where the "x" represents a single digit.  Intel also has x44 boards (which are used in SAPs).

[Adron]

No it isn't.

x86 means any CPU/ALU running off of an 86x86 chipset, where the "x" represents a single digit.  Intel also has x44 boards (which are used in SAPs).

80x86 actually. And Pentium is "x86", yet not 80x86. They switched so they'd be able to trademark the name. Numbers weren't trademarkable.

[R.a.B.B.i.T]

80x86?  Eh...I must be going crazy!  O well, my point still stands that x86 is any in a group of configurations, not just a single one.

[Mangix]

lookie what i just found out .

http://www.webopedia.com/TERM/x/x86.html

[Adron]

lookie what i just found out .

http://www.webopedia.com/TERM/x/x86.html

Intel's latest and sixth-generation chip is called the Pentium Pro.

Wow, that's a really up-to-date article!

[Joe[x86]]

Wow, MMX. Lets all go get the pentium pro!

Anyhow, Intel is no longer calling their processors x86, but instead IA32, which means Intel Archtecture, 32 bit. Intel's 80x86_64 chips are, obviously, the IA64 line.

Also, Adron, Pentium One / Pro was the 80586, wasn't it? We dropped the 80 part, but I belive technically it should still be there.

Code Select Expand

__ASM
{
    eax = 1336
    inc eax
    ret
}

[MyndFyre]

x86] link=topic=10786.msg107523#msg107523 date=1112749409]

Code Select Expand

__ASM
{
    eax = 1336
    inc eax
    ret
}

C(++) is case-sensitive, no?  Shouldn't that be "__asm"?

I guess you could have #defined it, but then again, why wouldn't you take away the leading underscores?  Seems somewhat silly.

BTW, you forgot to push/pop EAX.

[Maddox]

x86] link=topic=10786.msg107523#msg107523 date=1112749409]

Code Select Expand

__ASM
{
    eax = 1336
    inc eax
    ret
}

C(++) is case-sensitive, no?  Shouldn't that be "__asm"?

I guess you could have #defined it, but then again, why wouldn't you take away the leading underscores?  Seems somewhat silly.

BTW, you forgot to push/pop EAX.

I think the VS compiler intrinsically knows to push/pop a register used in inline asm unless you're writing a naked function.

[Adron]

x86] link=topic=10786.msg107523#msg107523 date=1112749409]
Also, Adron, Pentium One / Pro was the 80586, wasn't it? We dropped the 80 part, but I belive technically it should still be there.

Pro was the 686 I think..

[MyndFyre]

x86] link=topic=10786.msg107523#msg107523 date=1112749409]
Also, Adron, Pentium One / Pro was the 80586, wasn't it? We dropped the 80 part, but I belive technically it should still be there.

Pro was the 686 I think..

That is correct.

On an aside, very impressive were the performance gains seen by running Windows NT-based OSes on the Pentium Pro vs. similarly-stocked Pentium machines.

[Adron]

On an aside, very impressive were the performance gains seen by running Windows NT-based OSes on the Pentium Pro vs. similarly-stocked Pentium machines.

Oh.. I was choosing between a Pentium 200 MMX and a Pentium Pro 200 at one time. I picked the Pro. I ran NT based OS's on it for a very long time. I never did any direct comparisons though... How large was the difference?

[MyndFyre]

On an aside, very impressive were the performance gains seen by running Windows NT-based OSes on the Pentium Pro vs. similarly-stocked Pentium machines.

Oh.. I was choosing between a Pentium 200 MMX and a Pentium Pro 200 at one time. I picked the Pro. I ran NT based OS's on it for a very long time. I never did any direct comparisons though... How large was the difference?

From what I've read, a Pentium Pro running at 133MHz would outperform a Pentium 200 MMX with similar memory configurations.  This was supposed to only happen on NT-bases OSes, though -- not *nix or 16-bit Windows OSes.