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: andreas_wonisch who wrote (68923)	1/25/2002 4:19:36 PM
From: g_w_north	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 275872

>Hammer-compatible X86-64 instructions will be built into the chips, and Intel will decide down the road whether to turn it on or not. If Hammer does really well, they turn it on. If it doesn't, they don't. < They certainly make it sound easy to just include an x86-64 instruction set on the PIV.

To: andreas_wonisch who wrote (68923)	1/25/2002 4:44:17 PM
From: kapkan4u	Respond to of 275872

<I don't know why so many people are seeing this as good news for AMD... > If Intel's ISA is compatible with x86-64 then the news is good, otherwise bad, very bad. It is as simple as that. I don't see why Intel would do AMD a favor of compatibility, so my gut is telling me that the news is bad. Kap

To: andreas_wonisch who wrote (68923)	1/25/2002 7:53:23 PM
From: niceguy767	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 275872

andreas: Three years ago there were no IF's in INTc's future...Now it's all IF's...Fast way to lose credibility...Athy, by allowing AMD to compete superlatively across all performance ranges, signalled we indeed have a chess game...Hammer, if living up to expectation, might prove to be checkmate...

To: andreas_wonisch who wrote (68923)	1/25/2002 7:53:47 PM
From: Petz	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 275872

"Hammer gets hammered" -- NOT. Sorry, I don't see the logic in this. They act as if Yamhill could be added to the P4 tomorrow, when the Mercury news said it would be ready in "2003 or 2004." I've found any roadmap dates more than a year in the future always get delayed. If Intel decides to be "incompatible" with Hammer, and they want an early 2004 release, they would have to publish the instruction set architecture NOW, or there will be NO SOFTWARE for the chip. Meanwhile 5 quarters of Hammers will have already been sold before the first "P4+Yamhill" is sold. If Intel says NOTHING, the assumption will be that they will be using AMD's x86-64 and this will speed up M$'s support for x86-64. No way can Intel introduce P4's with Yamhill late this year. Petz

To: andreas_wonisch who wrote (68923)	1/25/2002 11:35:42 PM
From: hmaly	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 275872

Andreas Re...This is pretty bad news for AMD, easily the worst it has had the last couple years. Just by the time Hammer will start to get going, Intel will have the ability to match its major selling point any time it feels like it. When it's even, AMD doesn't win......... How will they be even. P4 just matches the current T-bird. The Hammer not only will have 86-64, but 2 cores, and memory controller on chip as well as HT busses. Plus, by the time the P4 comes out, everybody will know Intel just copies Hammer because Intel was desperate. In other words, Intel will have lost the technology lead Intel needs to command premiums for their chips. AMD has to pray that Intel has another Rambus-like fit of multi-year extended stupidity which lasts so long that they become Pepsi to Intel's Coke in the meantime. It could happen, but I don't think Intel is going to be quite that stupid. They'll get to the x86-64 party late, but not too late.<<<<< But if Intel is forced to drop the IA-64 in favor of 86-64 and copy AMD, Intel will be replaying the Rambus fiasco. What makes you think it won't hurt Intel and help AMD just as Rambus did. IMO it's Intel great strength that they never put ideology above profits <<<<<<<< I just don't consider it a great strength, that Intel puts profits above all else. The customer should always be first and foremost. Profit will come as a result of that, not vice versa.

To: andreas_wonisch who wrote (68923)	1/27/2002 5:52:02 AM
From: peter_luc	Respond to of 275872

Andreas, AnandTech picks up the Intel/X86-64 story. See anandtech.com The title: "Intel may design Hammer-like chip" A quote: "With a late 2003 release date, time is already working against the development of a 64-bit extension to the Pentium 4, especially if Intel would like the ability to disable it in the event that Itanium demand picks up. It is unlikely that Intel can simply "drop in" the 64-bit extensions to the Pentium 4 architecture. In fact, the modification may require a re-working of the entire Pentium 4 pipeline. Whether Intel uses this chip or not, it can be seen as a small victory for AMD. If Intel picks up on the x86-64 architecture, AMD is in the position of initially being the dominant player in the de-facto industry standard architecture, which is a position Intel has always occupied in the past. If Intel does not enter the x86-64 market, AMD has no competition in a market segment that has already gained significant support from developers and hardware manufacturers." Well, the cat is definitely out of the bag now. I wonder how Intel will be able to convince software developers and system builders (and analysts...) any longer that IA64 is the future. I also wonder how Compaq management is going to feel when they read this story. They bet all their future server development on IA64 while even giving away their crown jewels (Alpha). Now they hear that IA64 may become just a niche product. While I fully agree with you that it would have been a lot better if Intel had not developed that "plan B" the overall situation still looks quite good for AMD, IMO. All these stories about Intel preparing to copy X86-64 give "instant credibility" to AMD. The Hammer will be regarded with even more attention and software developers (Microsoft??) will be much more willing to give their support. Hammer may finally be seen as AMD's break-away chip, letting AMD step out of Intel's big shadow. In fact, if Intel follows AMD in this highly prestigious area, I would not call it just a "small" victory for AMD, as the above-mentioned article does, but a landslide victory. It may substantially change the general perception of AMD. And this may be the final entry ticket for AMD into the big commercial and even the server market. Peter