OT: was: Re: 32 or 64??

[Gilles Gravier]

Hi!

On 02/02/2010 20:29, Odd wrote:
> Gilles Gravier wrote:
>   
>> Hi!
>>
>> On 02/02/2010 19:33, Smoot Carl-Mitchell wrote:
>>     
>>> On Tue, 2010-02-02 at 11:55 -0500, Rashkae wrote:
>>>
>>>   
>>>       
>>>> I couldn't help but notice recently, much to my cost, that Intel is 
>>>> removing Virtualization extensions on all their current socket 775 
>>>> CPU's.. (how are the i5 and i7 faring?).  The only reason I can think 
>>>> for this move is to prevent the low end cpus from competing with the 
>>>> workstation/server market, since these cpu's are now more than fast 
>>>> enough for many workloads to be simply io bound.
>>>>     
>>>>         
>>> I would not surprise me that Intel would do this sort of thing. They are
>>> very clever at maintaining their profit margin.
>>>
>>>   
>>>       
>> FUD. All Intel processors (well... Celerons don't really qualify, here)
>> support VT-X.
>>     
> Not true. Here are some non-Celerons
> that do not support VT-x:
>
> Core Duo: T2050  / T2250  / T2300E  / T2450
> Core Duo 2: E4300  / E4400  / E4500  / E4600  / E4700
> Core 2 Quad: Q8200  / Q8200S
>
> As I've said repeatedly, you can all get your facts straight
> by going to this page:
>
> http://ark.intel.com/VTList.aspx
>   

You're right. But they are desktop processors.

Gilles.