Advanced Micro Devices - Moderated (AMD) 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 : Advanced Micro Devices - Moderated (AMD)

AMD 208.55

+0.5%

3:21 PM EST

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: Petz who wrote (73028)	3/3/2002 11:43:50 AM
From: dale_laroy	Read Replies (1) of 275872

>To do this, Intel would have to abandon Socket 478 and develop a whole new set of chipsets capable of handling the wider address bus. Motherboards would also have to support address bits that may never be enabled. There is no chance that all of this could even be ready by mid-03.< Bull! This is like saying that Intel had to develop a whole new set of suport chips for 386SX to support the wider address bus, instead of recycling the 286 pin-outs and signaling protocall. Certainly, Yamhill would be crippled relative to Clawhammer in a manner similar to the way 386SX was relative to 386DX, but this would not preclude Intel from introducing Yamhill with x86-64 support. >Another thing that doesn't make any sense is that, it will be at least March, 2003 before Intel even knows if Clawhammer is a "success." That is absolutely too late to get any kind of software support for a NEW instuction set, call it i86-64, before March, 2004.< Make that mid-2004 for adoption of hardware and sometime in 2007 for adoption of software and I might agree with you.

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next