Advanced Micro Devices Inc (AMD)

[chipguy]

Bonefish, that may be Intel's answer, but it is a very weak answer. Software emulation of
x86-32 on a different architecture (expecially one that clocks at a third the speed of a real x86)
will always be pathetic.

Emulation will always be pathetic but dynamic binary recompilation/translation is a proven
technology. For a while using FX!32 on Alpha was the fastest way to run many x86 binaries.
That specific technology achieved over half of native Alpha performance on x86 integer and
floating point intensive codes. IPF may be a more difficult platform for this than Alpha but
more than five years have passed to improve the algorithms.

No rational IS department will run x86 software on Itanium, except perhaps for offline
utilities which don't need speed. If they are true-blue Intel then they are much better advised
to run a Xeon server next to the Itanium server, and migrate as Itanium software becomes
available.

No one claims anyone will buy IPF systems to run x86 code as their primary production
programs, those will be native. But most companies have hundreds of secondary
programs, many developed in house, that can't realistically all be ported to IPF. These
perform important and not so important functions that aren't on critical paths or burn many
CPU cycles. The purpose of x86 compatibility for IPF, be it HW or SW based, is to run those
secondary legacy apps. If Intel can just approach FX!32 operating efficiency with its own
software scheme then that should have more than sufficient performance for this role.