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: fyodor_ who wrote (66064)	12/20/2001 10:05:10 PM
From: Win Smith	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 275872

Hammer may not compete in the same space as Itanic, though at the current run rate of 500 systems/quarter, who'd want to. But Gelsinger's line about there being no place for Hammer is rather extreme revisionist history. There is, or at least used to be, something called Deerfield on the Intel roadmaps, which was supposed to be the desktop level Itanic iteration, due in 2003 or so, depending on where in the eternally slipping IA-64 schedule you check. See, for example, entmag.com Following McKinley, around the year 2002, Intel will split the market, offering a 64-bit chip code-named Madison to the high end and another, lower-priced 64-bit chip code-named Deerfield to the volume market. Madison and Deerfield will be built on .13 micron architecture, compared with .18 for Merced and McKinley. While Merced and McKinley will be targeted to the high end workstation and server market, Deerfield will open 64-bit computing to the masses, Pollack relates. Intel may have given up on desktop Itanic for the moment, but that doesn't mean there's not a place for 64 bit computing there.

To: fyodor_ who wrote (66064)	12/22/2001 3:14:34 AM
From: pgerassi	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 275872

Dear Fyo: I have news for you! Clusters do not need to be hot swappable. The node simply deactivates that contains the failed CPU. It can also be planned to be off line. Since the node is not a huge portion, the overall system performance does not go down much, if it is noticed at all. The problem is that Xeons are memory limited where as Hammer will not be. I have seen PA-RISCs, RS/6000s and Alpha with 10 or more GB when SMP Xeons can't get more than 4GB. And most of those compare Xeons with that lousy OS from Redmond instead of a solid UNIX system. You know the one that you can't go multiuser with. You can hang 5000 users off the Power4 running Linux where only 1 can use the other OS on a Xeon SMP box. And software vendors charge much more for 5000 user licenses than a single user one. But one unplanned outage, and the savings of Xeons go up in smoke (even though it is more likely that single user OS being at fault)! Face it! Hammer can go head to head with IA-64 on all fronts. IA-64 can not do the same with Hammer or many of its rivals. The handwriting is being written on IA-64's tombstone. Intel is not willing to lose even more face and investors ire at another huge money wasting foul up. Pete