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: wanna_bmw who wrote (78541)	4/27/2002 7:47:12 AM
From: hmaly	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 275872

BMW Re...It's lower volume, but higher margin - a very simple concept. I don't know why some people have so hard comprehending it<<<<<<< We have a hard time comprehending it because Itanium was sold under the guise that by everyone selling the same chip, high volume, (relatively speaking),low margin,low design costs, would cut the costs. Now you are telling me that Itanium will be a low volume, high margin,high development cost chip. In addition, the ability to run x86-32 bit software was Itaniums main selling point,and that has been dropped. And you want me to buy that it will turn into a great seller. I wouldn't and neither will a lot of other people. can't speak for the future, but right now, IA-64 has more than 10x the software support that Hammer has, and a better prospect for future development, given the number of currently outstanding commitments.<<<<<<<< What a crock. Hammer runs 32 bit software just fine, according to Van's, and there are tens if not hundreds of times 32 bit software over IA-64. In addition, now both Linux64 and Windows 64 do. As far as the commitments are concerned, who are you trying to kid. I will bet you that Hammer, after 6 months, has far more commitments, than Itanium 2 does.

To: wanna_bmw who wrote (78541)	4/27/2002 9:57:19 AM
From: Dan3	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 275872

Re: Hammer has the new Windows design win, but developer commitments have yet to happen. It's just a 32-bit chip until it has 64-bit software. No matter how you spin it, Hammer needs 64-bit code to run in 64-bit. That still makes it no better than Itanium. There is a big difference, Hammer runs very well with 32-bit software - Itanic doesn't. Pentium was "just a 16-bit chip" according to your definition when let Intel take over the CPU business. Consider it this way, if you had your choice between two chips with roughly the same price and performance (on the installed base of 32-bit software), but one was 32 bit only and the other was 64 bit, which would you buy? If it were your own money being spent, ignoring who made if for now (choose between P4 and Yamhill, for example). Which would you buy, the 32-bit chip or the 64-bit chip?