Is there any word that I said is wrong?

[AJana1]

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:X86&type=revision&diff=748746089&oldid=748745455 Talk:X86: Difference between revisions - Wikipedia

But I have something to figure out which I could not go agree with you, especially for terms, such as 32-bit x86 and 64-bit x86. As is known to all or to some, x86 is mostly used to represent the 32-bit IBM PC architecture (IA-32 architecture or the architecture of x86). And people also extend its usage towards to the processors based on the x86-64 architecture. So in my own opinion, x86 is not a term of architecture, but a term of sort of common things. So there would be nothing like 32-bit x86 or 64-bit x86. x86-64, AMD64 or Intel 64 is an 64-bit architecture which takes and keeps the original IA-32 architecture alongside with its native one. The legacy 32-bit architecture is kept in its original taste, so in other words, from some aspects, this 64-bit architecture is another one rather than the purely 64-bitlised of IA-32 or x86, so one could not say something so easily like 64-bit x86 is x86-64!The inventor of IA-32/x86 is Intel, but the inventor of x86-64 is the AMD and/or DEC Alpha group, so they both have different motivations and different believes. So AMD64 does not break the original 32-bit architecture, keeping it in its original style and sealing it onto the Legacy Mode. So one could not so easily make such irresponsible decision like 64-bit x86 is x86-64! At least, there are no words from Intel or AMD, to say something like that! --- Aaron Janagewen

Is there any word that I said on Wikipedia.org is wrong?

[AlHill]

Do you share credit with the reviewer?

Doc

[AJana1]

Sorry, I do not understand what you mean here. For my words, I need positive voices from Intel Corporation.

[idata]

Hello Janagewen,

I would like to clarify some of the information you mentioned;

• Intel introduced the x86 architecture on 1978 with the 8086 cpu (it was a 16-bit cpu).
• In 1985, enhanced the x86 architecture with the 80386 cpu, and since this one was 32-bit, the term IA-32 was implemented.

Since then, the term IA-32 was used to indicate that it was x86 architecture with 32-bit support. Eventually this was shorten as x86-32

• AMD introduced x86-64 in the year 2000. x86-64 is defined as the 64-bit version of the x86 instruction set.
• Intel introduces Itanium processors in 2001, featuring 64-bit architecture, named IA-64. This had no x86 instructions.
• Intel decided to use x86-64 architecture in Xeon processors in 2003. Intel named this as Intel Extended Memory 64 Technology (EM64T). However, in late 2006, Intel began to lessen the use of the name EM64T and began to refer to it as the Intel 64.

For further reference; https://software.intel.com/en-us/articles/intel-extended-memory-64-technology-faq, and more information; http://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/architecture-and-technology/microarchitecture/intel-64-architecture-general.html

Regards,

Amy.

[AJana1]

Hello Amy,

I am so thankful for your reply. I have a question, is this answer on the behalf of Intel. or just you?

Best Regards,

Aaron Janagewen

[idata]

The answer was provided by one of our processors engineer.

Regards,

Amy.

[AlHill]

I suspect he is asking so as to use Intel as endorsing his wiki content.

Doc

[n_scott_pearson]

Which Intel will not do...

[AJana1]

I do not want to pick it as the correct answer but I have picked. It is just like some a yesterday girl does not belonged to anyone. After married, she belongs to what she does not belong to. One just has to face with this sorrow, missing that chance forever.