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 (71982)	2/19/2002 11:17:48 PM
From: eCo	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 275872

fyo, for the latest on McKinley, check out Paul Demone's recent report (2/18) covering the ISSCC. He also laments the demise of EV8 (as do we all). realworldtech.com From his conclusion: In contrast to the EV8’s cold grave, the McKinley seems to have a bright future ahead of it. Unlike the execrable Merced, the second generation IA64 processor is a well designed chip with an incredibly capable on-chip cache hierarchy. That cache hierarchy, combined with many other measures to minimize instruction latency as well as increase the clock rate, should help McKinley overcome the burden of an ill-conceived and misguided instruction set architecture to yield respectable integer and floating point performance levels. By offering decent high end performance at relatively low costs (from its chip merchant business and potential economies of scale), Intel and its business partners will likely see strong customer acceptance when it officially releases McKinley later this year. Perhaps enough to turn the corner and start paying a return on the billions invested in IA64 over the past eight years. I'm not sure about the 'low cost' conjecture, 300mm notwithstanding. This chip is huge. eCo

To: fyodor_ who wrote (71982)	2/20/2002 12:38:34 AM
From: THE WATSONYOUTH	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 275872

I assume McKinley system costs will be on roughly par with the top Sun systems and significantly below Power4 (this might depend on how heavily IBM chooses to push Power4 in the lower price-ranges (right now, the cheapest Power4 system will run a cool quarter million USD). IBM seems to have left Power3 to handle the mid-range and unless this changes by the time McKinley comes out, Intel would seem to have a pretty good shot at decent sales of McKinley. theinquirer.net This was a IBM server road map published last year. Seems like they (this year) plan to extend the Power4 architecture all the way down to one way systems. THE WATSONYOUTH