Could anyone from Softimage please confirm (re 64bit version of XSI)

Mailing List

Home

Forum Home

Softimage

Carrara

trueSpace

Dir3d-l

Maya - a powerful 3D animation and visual effects software

Macromedia Flash Development

Subjects

•	Cameras
•	scaleDown command
•	black out solved
•	Aircraft Tutorial
•	Mathematical XYZ ?
•	Its done This vs That
•	Its done first week
•	recommendations for screen video captures?
•	3DExplorer "Oddity "
•	New Director
•	ProTeam renewals
•	Fuel 's new websites (X post)
•	Blue peter create a make toy
•	targeting groups question
•	XPost: Shockwave 3D game ( sort of )
•	RES: RES: RES: Fish Modeling
•	Emitting particles from object intersection
•	Fuel 's new websites (X post)
•	Texturing
•	Big Break Contest Videos
•	New Plugins
•	Models and Texture on my updated site
•	Error Installing Patch tS6 6
•	Plasma?
•	Looking for Inspiration
•	Weird EMail Q
•	It 's done first week ?
•	Cherry not cranberry
•	New game
•	Camera Animation Problem
•	Particle plugins?

Could anyone from Softimage please confirm (re 64bit version of XSI)

Could anyone from Softimage please confirm (re 64bit version of XSI)

2005-04-28 - By Luc-Eric Rousseau

Back

Reply: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 >>

it doesn't really matter which compiler switches are used;
these optimizer switches reorder intruction very slightly
to favor one processor over another in very restricted cases
that would likely only show up in benchmarks, and may not be valid with future
revisions. A variety of other factors about the machine, like speed, cache
and hard disk, will have much more effect on the performance of software.
We won't publish how we compile the compile the application; it will run
on either AMD or Intel, how fast depends on the specific machine.

-- --Original Message-- --
From: owner-xsi@(protected) [mailto:owner-xsi@(protected)]On Behalf Of
lpiasecki76
Posted At: Thursday, April 28, 2005 6:26 PM
Posted To: xsi
Conversation: Could anyone from Softimage please confirm (re 64bit version of
XSI)
Subject: RE: Could anyone from Softimage please confirm (re 64bit version of
XSI)

Luc, since my question was 'bizzare', could you explain please, why then are
there two separate compiler optimization flags in VS2005 for AMD64 and EM64T:

favor:EM64T and favor:AMD64 ?

If they are indeed identical, then separating those does not make sense to me.

Luke

__ __

From: owner-xsi@(protected) [mailto:owner-xsi@(protected)] On Behalf Of
Benjamin Huber
Sent: Thursday, April 28, 2005 5:51 PM
To: XSI@(protected)
Subject: RE: Could anyone from Softimage please confirm (re 64bit version of
XSI)

now hold on - maybe i'm super duh! here but does that imply that whatever 64bit
extensions intel added to their Xeons

is fully compatible with that AMD did earlier with their opterons?

thanks,

-ben

---
ben huber (x83291)
ilm digimatte
masters of funny cards
---

-- --Original Message-- --
From: owner-xsi@(protected) [mailto:owner-xsi@(protected)]On Behalf Of Luc
-Eric Rousseau
Sent: Thursday, April 28, 2005 2:38 PM
To: XSI@(protected)
Subject: RE: Could anyone from Softimage please confirm (re 64bit version of
XSI)

That's a bizzare question, because there is no way to make a 64-bit application

that runs on AMD64 or Intel xeon 64-bit, without "compiling it for the opteron"
.

There is just one intruction set.

-- --Original Message-- --
From: owner-xsi@(protected) [mailto:owner-xsi@(protected)]On Behalf Of
lpiasecki76
Posted At: Thursday, April 28, 2005 5:14 PM
Posted To: xsi
Conversation: Could anyone from Softimage please confirm (re 64bit version of
XSI)
Subject: Could anyone from Softimage please confirm (re 64bit version of XSI)

We will be getting 5-10 extra seats with either 64bit Opteron or Xeons.

Previously it seemed that AMD and SI were partners. With regards to the 64-bit
version of XSI. Will it be 'targeted' (compiled) for Opterons or Xeons? Could
you please give us some preliminary speed benchmarks regarding the performance
of 64-bit XSI on 64-bit Opteron vs. Xeon systems?

Kind regards,

Luke Piasecki

QA Assurance Specialist

TVWorks - division of Comcast

tel.: 963-4327

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40" xmlns:v =
"urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o =
"urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w =
"urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:st1 =
"urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags"><HEAD>
<META HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" CONTENT="text/html; charset=iso-8859 (See http://iso-8859.ora-code.com)-1">

<META content="MSHTML 6.00.2800.1498" name=GENERATOR><o:SmartTagType name="time"
namespaceuri="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags"></o:SmartTagType><o
:SmartTagType
name="date"
namespaceuri="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags"></o:SmartTagType><o
:SmartTagType
name="PersonName"
namespaceuri="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags"></o:SmartTagType>
<STYLE>@(protected) {
font-family: Tahoma;
}
@(protected) {
font-family: Comic Sans MS;
}
@(protected) Section1 {size: 21.0cm 842.0pt; margin: 72.0pt 89.85pt 72.0pt 89.85pt; }
P.MsoNormal {
FONT-SIZE: 12pt; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman"
}
LI.MsoNormal {
FONT-SIZE: 12pt; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman"
}
DIV.MsoNormal {
FONT-SIZE: 12pt; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman"
}
A:link {
COLOR: blue; TEXT-DECORATION: underline
}
SPAN.MsoHyperlink {
COLOR: blue; TEXT-DECORATION: underline
}
A:visited {
COLOR: purple; TEXT-DECORATION: underline
}
SPAN.MsoHyperlinkFollowed {
COLOR: purple; TEXT-DECORATION: underline
}
P {
FONT-SIZE: 12pt; MARGIN-LEFT: 0cm; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0cm; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New
Roman"; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto
}
SPAN.EmailStyle17 {
COLOR: windowtext; FONT-FAMILY: Arial; mso-style-type: personal
}
SPAN.EmailStyle19 {
COLOR: navy; FONT-FAMILY: Arial; mso-style-type: personal-reply
}
DIV.Section1 {
page: Section1
}
</STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY lang=EN-CA vLink=purple link=blue>
<DIV>it doesn't really matter which compiler switches are
used;</DIV>
<DIV>these optimizer switches reorder intruction very
slightly</DIV>
<DIV>to favor one processor over another in very restricted
cases</DIV>
<DIV>that would likely only show up in benchmarks, and may
not be valid with future</DIV>
<DIV>revisions.  A variety of other
factors about the machine, like
speed, cache </DIV>
<DIV>and hard disk, will have much
more effect on
the performance of
software.   </DIV>
<DIV>We won't publish how we compile the compile the application; it will
run
</DIV>
<DIV>on either AMD or Intel, how fast depends on the
specific machine.</DIV>
<DIV> -- --Original Message-- -- From: owner-xsi@(protected)
[mailto:owner-xsi@(protected)]On Behalf Of lpiasecki76 Posted
At: Thursday, April 28, 2005 6:26 PM Posted To:
xsi Conversation: Could anyone from Softimage please confirm (re
64bit
version of XSI) Subject: RE: Could anyone from Softimage please
confirm (re 64bit version of XSI) </DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr
style="PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #000080 2px solid;
MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV class=Section1>
Luc, since my
question was ‘bizzare’, could you explain please, why then are
there two
separate compiler optimization flags in VS2005 for AMD64 and
EM64T:<o:p></o:p>
favor:EM64T and
favor:AMD64 ?<o:p></o:p>
If they are indeed
identical, then separating those does not make sense to
me.<o:p></o:p>
<o:p> </o:p>
Luke<o:p></o:p>
<o:p> </o:p>
<o:p> </o:p>
<DIV
style="BORDER-RIGHT: medium none; PADDING-RIGHT: 0cm; BORDER-TOP: medium none
; PADDING-LEFT: 4pt; PADDING-BOTTOM: 0cm; BORDER-LEFT: blue 1.5pt solid; PADDING
-TOP: 0cm; BORDER-BOTTOM: medium none">
<DIV>
<DIV class=MsoNormal style="TEXT-ALIGN: center" align=center>
<HR tabIndex=-1 align=center width="100%" SIZE=2>
</DIV>
From: owner-xsi@(protected)
[mailto:owner-xsi@(protected)] On Behalf
Of Benjamin Huber Sent: Thursday, <st1:date w:st="on"
ls="trans" Month="4" Day="28" Year="2005">April 28, 2005</st1:date> <st1:time
w:st="on" Hour="17" Minute="51">5:51 PM</st1:time> To: <st1:PersonName
w:st="on">XSI@(protected)</st1:PersonName> Subject: RE: Could anyone from Softimage
please confirm (re 64bit version of XSI)<o:p></o:p></DIV>
<o:p> </o:p>
<DIV>
now hold on - maybe
i'm super duh! here but does that imply that whatever 64bit extensions intel
added to their Xeons<o:p></o:p></DIV>
<DIV>
is fully compatible
with that AMD did earlier with their
opterons?<o:p></o:p></DIV>
<DIV>
 <o:p></o:p></DIV>
<DIV>
thanks,<o:p></o:p></DIV>
<DIV>
 <o:p></o:p></DIV>
<DIV>
-ben<o
:p></o:p></DIV>
<DIV>
--- ben huber
(x83291) ilm digimatte
 masters of funny
cards ---
<o:p></o:p></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="BORDER-RIGHT: medium none; PADDING-RIGHT: 0cm; BORDER-TOP: medium none
; PADDING-LEFT: 4pt; PADDING-BOTTOM: 0cm; MARGIN: 5pt 0cm 5pt 3.75pt; BORDER
-LEFT: blue 1.5pt solid; PADDING-TOP: 0cm; BORDER-BOTTOM: medium none">
-- --Original
Message-- -- From:
owner-xsi@(protected) [mailto:owner-xsi@(protected)]On Behalf Of Luc-Eric
Rousseau Sent: Thursday,
<st1:date w:st="on" ls="trans" Month="4" Day="28" Year="2005">April 28,
2005</st1:date> <st1:time w:st="on" Hour="14" Minute="38">2:38
PM</st1:time> To:
<st1:PersonName w:st="on">XSI@(protected)</st1:PersonName> Subject: RE: Could anyone from
Softimage please confirm (re 64bit version of
XSI)<o:p></o:p>
<DIV>
That's a
bizzare question, because there is no way to make a 64-bit
application<o:p></o:p></DIV>
<DIV>
that
runs
on AMD64 or Intel xeon 64-bit, without "compiling it for the
opteron".  <o:p></o:p></DIV>
<DIV>
There is
just one intruction set.<o:p></o:p></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="BORDER-RIGHT: medium none; PADDING-RIGHT: 0cm; BORDER-TOP: medium
none; PADDING-LEFT: 4pt; PADDING-BOTTOM: 0cm; MARGIN: 5pt 0cm 5pt 3.75pt;
BORDER-LEFT: navy 1.5pt solid; PADDING-TOP: 0cm; BORDER-BOTTOM: medium none">
-- --Original
Message-- -- From:
owner-xsi@(protected) [mailto:owner-xsi@(protected)]On Behalf Of lpiasecki76 Posted At: Thursday, <st1:date
w:st="on" ls="trans" Month="4" Day="28" Year="2005">April 28,
2005</st1:date> <st1:time w:st="on" Hour="17" Minute="14">5:14
PM</st1:time> Posted To:
xsi Conversation: Could
anyone from Softimage please confirm (re 64bit version of XSI) 
Subject: Could anyone from Softimage
please confirm (re 64bit version of XSI)<o:p></o:p>
We will be getting 5-10 extra
seats with either 64bit Opteron or Xeons.<o:p></o:p>
Previously it seemed that AMD
and SI were partners. With regards to the 64-bit version of XSI. Will it
be ‘targeted’ (compiled) for Opterons or Xeons? Could you
please give us
some preliminary speed benchmarks regarding the performance of 64-bit XSI
on 64-bit Opteron vs. Xeon systems?<o:p></o:p>
<o:p> </o:p>
Kind
regards,<o:p></o:p>
<o:p> </o:p>
Luke
Piasecki<o:p></o:p>
QA Assurance
Specialist<o:p></o:p>
TVWorks – division of
Comcast<o:p></o:p>
tel.:
963-4327<o:p></o:p>
<o:p> </o:p>
<o:p> </o:p></BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE></DIV></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>