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: Paul Engel who wrote (126780)	2/6/2001 10:05:14 PM
From: Rob Young	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

Paul, <Rob - "McKinley is a toy compared to Power4." Compaq doesn't think so.> Last I checked, IBM manufactures and sells the Power line of CPUs. That 32 processor McKinley box will be a decent box for some folks... and the AlphaServer side of the house has tossed the Global Switch over the fence to that group. The AlphaServer folks bid adieu to the Global Switch in the next generation of high-end AlphaServers. Wildfire uses it, Marvel won't. Guess which box will have much greater performance, Wildfire or Marvel? (Cheating a bit here... suppose you only had 32 CPUs in Marvel and the full 32 in a Wildfire, now guess which one is higher performing?) Maybe you can help Tench out on that "why McKinley is a toy compared to Power4" quiz... I did provide the URL with the answer. Rob

To: Paul Engel who wrote (126780)	2/7/2001 8:58:02 AM
From: Dan3	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 186894

Re: post a report where ANYBODY has committed to writing ANYTHING for the Hamsters. No problem. Microsoft has released Windows 2000 for it, as well as SQL Server, IIS, Back Office, Visual Studio, Office and a host of other applications. They have a beta of whistler available for it now. Oracle has released all versions of its server and tools, Borland has released Delphi and its other tools, the list goes on and on. You see, Paul, the Hammers run mainstream code at full speed, and can take advantage of 64bit extensions where they are needed. Buyers can implement Hammer solutions without fear of some application critical to their business not being available, or bogging their installation into uselessness. Itanium/McKinley, on the other hand, is a useless (well, unless your boat is in need of anchor) lump of junk unless the day ever comes that every custom and COTS (commercial off the shelf) software package needed by a given installation has been re-written to run on it. There are a limited number of applications where a large expensive machine runs one piece of code (a dedicated database server that is part of a cluster of other servers, for example) but in these cases Compaq's Alphas are already better solutions - with a solid track record, too. Emulation at Pentium 100 speeds just isn't good enough for a platform that's hoping to sell in high volume - it's the older applications and the custom applications that are generally most inefficient in the first place, and many of them simply cannot be rewritten due to lack of source or staff. Intel will be able to give away thousands of these systems as toys, and will eventually sell a few 100 thousand to their most sycophantic customers. But, in the end, Itanic will be a low volume platform for a while then die. How can it possibly compete with AMD's similar but fully X86 compatible 64 bit Hammers? Even Intel couldn't market the 860 series against X86 compatible alternatives. You've been spreading so much joy over on the AMD thread, this morning, it seemed only fair to bring a little cheer back here. I installed a beta of whistler on a notebook yesterday - guess which 64bit CPU is designed to run it and which one isn't? :-) Dan