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: pgerassi who wrote (59446)	10/20/2001 8:37:23 PM
From: Paul Engel	Respond to of 275872

Re: "Creating a microarchitecture based on an already existing architecture seems to typically take two years" Which makes the Hamster even MORE PATHETIC - since it started in 1998 and won't hit the streets until 2003. Can anybody say "FIVE YEAR HAMSTER !!!</b? ?

To: pgerassi who wrote (59446)	10/20/2001 10:19:30 PM
From: dale_laroy	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 275872

>If Hammer or any other x86 CPU out performs IA-64 by a factor of two or more, Itanium is dead, period! If Hammer merely is as fast on Itanium optimized applications, Itanium with its far higher costs will die. The Itanium has to deliver at least twice the performance of any other CPU, to keep the mind share it has.< Historically, a processor has had to deliver three times the performance of an entrenched architecture to dislodge it. For all intents and purposes, Itanium can be considered and entrenched architecture. As for Itanium's higher costs, while this is true of Intel's traditional Xeon market sectors, Itanium promises a significantly lower cost than was attained by the MIPS, PA-RISC, and Alpha systems it will be displacing. For x86-64 to draw the market away from Itanium in these high end markets, x86-64 will have to deliver at least three times the performance of Itanium.