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.

Technology Stocks : Intel Corporation (INTC) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Joe NYC who wrote (111911)	10/1/2000 5:33:15 AM
From: Tenchusatsu	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

Joe, <386, 486 and even Pentium were successful even without a serious software support. (I don't count DOS extenders, and Win3.x). All this happened when there actually was a need for 32 bit software.> There is a big difference. By the time Windows 95 came out, there were barely any 286-based PCs out there. Most computers were already capable of 32-bit processing. AMD is hoping that software developers will simply move to x86-64 with time. But even AMD can't hope for more than 20% total market share, and that share is destined to decrease as Intel continues building more manufacturing capacity. Then if AMD were even able to transition 100% of their manufacturing to Sledgehammers, x86-64 will only penetrate 20% of new PCs. And the vast majority of existing PCs out there won't ever be capable of x86-64 execution. The only hope AMD has is to make x86-64 so ubiquitous that Intel will have no choice but to copy them. Judging from how little success AMD had in making 3DNow ubiquitous, I really doubt AMD will have any success with x86-64. And the market x86-64 is initially targeting, high-end database server applications which need 64-bit addressing, will already be taken over by Itanium and IA-64. (Or if not Itanium, Sun UltraSparc III.) <What do you think is more challenging, starting from zero % market share with an incompatible processor or starting from the top of the 90% plus mainstream market with a compatible processor?> Think Sledgehammer will have better performance than Northwood or Gallatin (Pentium 4 and Pentium 4 Xeon, respectively)? Remember that Sledgehammer will need specific compiler optimizations for best performance, just like Pentium 4 and P4 Xeon. Tenchusatsu