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 41.98

+3.6%

1:51 PM EST

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: Tenchusatsu who wrote (166383)	6/14/2002 10:18:05 PM
From: dumbmoney	Read Replies (3) of 186894

64-bit performance and the same low costs that made Xeon successful against the RISC guys. The "64-bit performance" of the brand new Itanium II is lower than the "32-bit performance" of Xeon (Pentium 4). And let's not pretend that Itanium is any where near as cost effective as Xeon. (What's the cost per Itanium CPU of the R&D so far? Never mind the silicon cost). So that leaves 64-bitness (minus the "performance") as the only reason for being. I'm still waiting for a cogent explaination of why Intel shouldn't shift all its resources into x86, add a 64-bit mode, kill off AMD, and kill off the RISC guys will unbeatable economics of scale (as opposed to a rococo architecture that nobody needs).

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next