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: nixtox who wrote (81195)	5/31/2002 4:14:55 PM
From: wanna_bmw	Read Replies (4) \| Respond to of 275872

Nick, Re: "Why can't Intel promote both x86-64 and IA-64 at the same time? >> It would not make much sense: they both go after the same market." Really? How many 4-way and above servers will AMD be selling with their whitebox reference design? 80% of the server market is controlled by 4 main OEMs. How many of these have committed to designing robust Hammer based servers with the RAS and features that are required to sell in that market? Itanium has 3 out of the 4 of the major OEMs supporting it, as well as a host of tier-2 support. Hammer has not announced support from a single tier-1 or tier-2 OEM, and even if one were to commit today on designing a robust system around Hammer, they aren't likely to have anything out before late 2003. And even then, it will be a 32-bit system, since none of the high end ISVs have announced 64-bit support for Hammer. Microsoft can design their own complete whitebox system built with Windows, SQL, and some bundled development apps, but those aren't likely to penetrate more than a couple percentage points of the 4-way and above market - which makes me wonder why Microsoft bothers at all with AMD, unless the rumors from The Register are grossly over-exaggerated. Given the rest of the hype around Hammer, I'm likely to believe that may be the case. wbmw