Intel Corporation (INTC) 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.

Technology Stocks : Intel Corporation (INTC)

INTC 35.81

+0.2%

Nov 25 3:59 PM EST

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: Paul Engel who wrote (111627)	9/28/2000 9:26:26 AM
From: pgerassi	Read Replies (1) of 186894

Dear Paul: I can analyze a CPU by how one could get to point B from a known point A. The fact that you can't is your problem not mine. Face it, Intel blew it when going VLIW with Itanium. It should have been very easy to design and make high performance silicon. That is why the optimization is designed into the compiler. But, it has taken Intel five years (and still counting) to make silicon that can not even meet the low standard speeds it set itself. The compiler still is not up to snuff but, I have seen many try to make good VLIW compilers and fail. So in that, I do not think Intel has failed but still coming to grips with it. Given the execution of the first half of the design, does not make it look good for the second more difficult half. That is why everyone at Intel says to wait for the HP designed product. That says scads about Intel's current state in engineering design. Also I will not pay thousands (why should I, you like it so much so you do it. Where are your simulation results for Itanium?) for a simulator for what I still think is a stupid design. X86-64 is an evolution of an existing design and much easier to relate future performance to current performance. The fact that Intel chose a different plan (against all previous experience with going off the mainstream path) is to is Intel's fault. AMD is going the tried and true route (what Intel has done in the past) of not throwing the baby (x86 instruction set) out with the bath water. Thus AMD's Hammer family will probably perform no slower at 64 bit than Athlon does at 32 bit and could perform much faster. It will be able to match or more probably exceed Athlon at 32 bit software. Itanium will be a dog with 32 bit x86 software (probably slower than the current top Celeron). And the more you shoot your mouth off you show that you can't cover Intel's mistakes with facts but, with personal attacks. Well, I will take GVTucker's advice and start to ignore your personal attacks. When you have something constructive to say, I may start reading your messages again. Pete

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next