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: Joe NYC who wrote (78398)	4/25/2002 8:00:55 PM
From: wanna_bmw	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 275872

Joe, Re: "This is my point. The biggest competitor of Itanium is and will be Xeon. And Xeon can't cede the top end to Itanium, because it is facing competition from Athlon. If there were no AMD and no Hammer, Intel could just limit the resources devoted to Xeon (server chipsets - # of CPUs, bandwidth etc.) just to leave the high end to Itanium. But because of AMD, Intel is forced to make the Xeon line as good as it can possibly be, to keep AMD away." I recognize your point, Joe. I agree that this is exactly what has happened. I have always been a fan of IA-64, but only recently have I caught a glimpse of performance, and I have to say that I am impressed. Itanium 2 is able to achieve almost 30% performance over the fastest .18u generation Xeon MP - with Hyperthreading. And this is in TPC, a very intensive test involving the CPU, memory, and I/O. That Itanium 2 is able to achieve such an increase in performance (especially in a benchmark that scales rather poorly with the CPU) speaks volumes about the IA-64 architecture, its scalability, and its prospects for the future (think IA-64 with Hyperthreading...). Corporations are more than willing to spend proportionally more money for more performance, especially in the transaction processing market. Itanium 2 seems to offer quite a bit more to the table, with a 4 processor score close to 70K TpmC. This kind of performance should give Itanium 2 the credibility of a "high end" CPU, and then it will be up to Intel to migrate the industry towards 64-bit software. The RISC market isn't going away overnight. For the first couple years, Intel can get Itanium 2 entrenched in this market with solid infrastructure, before being forced to move it down to higher volume markets. I think that's the way that Intel will have to handle it, if they want it to be successful. It's gone from a downhill battle to more of an uphill one, but I wouldn't count it out of the race, yet. wbmw

To: Joe NYC who wrote (78398)	4/25/2002 8:35:34 PM
From: bacchus_ii	Respond to of 275872

RE:"The only reason why Itanium still exists is because of deep pockets of Intel, the fact that the management is willing to indefinetly sign the blank checks for it. Any cost benefit analysis would have killed Itanium by now." Not only from Intel. Intel invited many consortium to invest hundreds of millions on itanium.... If they drop the ball... some will sue for sure. Gottfried

To: Joe NYC who wrote (78398)	4/26/2002 3:45:19 AM
From: hmaly	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 275872

Jozef Re...The only reason why Itanium still exists is because of deep pockets of Intel, the fact that the management is willing to indefinetly sign the blank checks for it. Any cost benefit analysis would have killed Itanium by now. Exactly. If Itanium had been developed by Ge, Itanium would have been dead a long time ago. The main reason it isn't dead, and Intel has such deep pockets here, is that Craig knows that when Itanium is dead meat, he is also dead meat. Craig's only option to save his name and reputation is to either make Itanium a success or get the hell out before, rather than after, so he can blame his successor.