Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

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 -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Charles R who wrote (81081)	11/25/1999 4:18:00 PM
From: Tenchusatsu	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1574373

Chuck, <Since you are inside Intel, you may want to send an e-mail to Colwell and find out why he is pushing for the same thing at Intel after having lost the battle the last time around.> I don't know what you're talking about, but I see what you are trying to hint. You see, 64-bit extensions are not all that special. Yet AMD is trying to derail the IA-64 train with their x86-64 plans. That's the fantasy I'm talking about. It's not that x86-64 is useless; in fact, they may turn out to be rather useful for a handful of applications. But for AMD to say that x86-64 is the right way to go, and throw not-so-subtle hints that IA-64 is the wrong way to go, now that's hogwash. Believe me, Chuck, I've seen the arguments raised at MPF. And I still think that x86-64 is nothing but a fantasy, not because it's a bad idea in itself (it isn't), but that AMD is hoping that x86-64 will bring x86 to IA-64 performance levels. (Yes, Fred Weber from AMD was indeed hinting at this.) Tenchusatsu