Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: d[-_-]b who wrote (110385)	5/11/2000 3:40:00 PM
From: Joe NYC	Read Replies (2) of 1574392

Eric, What's your point? My point is that the OS is nowhere being near ready. Itanium is already 2 to 3 years late, and the OS is not even in beta. A general (beta) developer release is on track for release this summer and the final version will ship with the official IA-64 launch. That's possible. Especially since the official launch of Itanium is such a moving target. THe only other project that I have been following that had a similar execution was Cyrix MXi project. For every quarter that passed, the planned launch date was postponed one or more quarters. One of the reasons was that each delay made it uncompetitive, so the internal target for the performance of the chips was raised and launch delayed further. I see a parallel here. It is taking forever to get Merced to work with some degree of stability at 800 MHz target, which would barely be competitive today. If the launch date slips to 2001, 800 MHz will begin to look like a joke, as most processors will be > 1GHz, Foster and Mustang may be at 1.6 GHz. Joe

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next