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 : Advanced Micro Devices - Moderated (AMD) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: semiconeng who wrote (22689)	12/17/2000 12:31:36 PM
From: Daniel Schuh	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 275872

Itanium will run all 32 bit applications just as fast as current 32 bit chips. Nice joke, SCE. Maybe McKinley. Mysterious Merced, alleged to be emerging from permanent pilot production any quarter now? Forgive my bemusement at that assertion.

To: semiconeng who wrote (22689)	12/17/2000 2:07:52 PM
From: porn_start878	Respond to of 275872

-----While I agree that Digital may have been big, my point was, they weren't big in "Semiconductors". Digital Equipment Corp, may have been lots of things, but chips weren't their main business. And look where they are...... aren't today Intel isn't big in High-end 64bit server. Intel would have suffered the exact same sort if they had left x86... that's what DEC made. -----Sure, and Itanium will run all 32 bit applications just as fast as current 32 bit chips. Granted, it won't run them any faster, but the question is, Since Corporations will initially be the main target for 64 bit, and since they will need to buy new hardware regardless of whether it is IA-64 or Hammer, The question of success is will corporations go for something that runs 32 bit better, that is extended to 64 (Hammer), or will they go with something that runs all their current 32 bit, as well as being designed specifically for the emerging 64 bit. If I'm spending my companies money, I would go with the true 64 that is backwards compatible, rather than the 32 bit that is forward compatible. I agree with the logic, but it's not as black and white as you desribe. True : Itanium can emulate 32 bit code False : it won't be as fast as competition in 32 bit code; far from as fast... it may be, in the best case, as fast as a true 450MHz x86 chip. False : it's NOT fully backward compatible... it's a brand new instruction set. It needs a brand new OS, and recompiled software. Hammer won't "emulate" 64 bits code... it'll be a true 64bit chip. True : it won't be VLWIS infrastructure, but it won't be as bad in 64 bit code as the Itanium will be in 32 bit code. Just my decision, but I believe that more purchasing departments will agree with me than not. At least they don't seem to rush on it :). They'll evaluate the benefits off keeping things simple and reasonnably fast or changing everything for a sporadically faster system. Max