Advanced Micro Devices Inc (AMD)

[blauboad]

I think Stroligo's got the idea. I doubt Prescott will be 64bit (or at least that this feature would be activated), but Intel's and MS's comments certainly suggest that Tejas will be. If Tejas does sample in Q1 (and they're having enough problems with Prescott!) and Intel manages to start selling 6 months later (optimistic, probably, given the novelty of what they're trying to do), then that puts initial release right at the point around Q3-4, or right when AMD64 has really ramped up and conversion to 90nm is happening.

I agree, too, that Intel will couple Tejas with an IPF co-processor rather than AMD64 or Yamhill--because neither of those would require enough extra silicon to make splitting up the part sensible. If Intel is serious about pushing 64bit to the desktop, this is going to be the only way to ensure backwards compatibility without a performance hit.

Of course, this is going to be a ridiculously expensive way of going about it, either for consumers or for Intel (if they subsidize it, which seems to be the IPF business model so far). Assuming that AMD64 will be priced closely with Intel's 32bit offerings, it will be a hard sell to get customers to buy two processors to get 64bit. Then think about the power profile of the Prescwatt successor plus an Itanium in the same box. No notebooks off this combo...

From what I'm reading, this is going to be a hard sell, unless Intel leapfrogs AMD in performance or unless AMD really botches 90nm.

From Intel's perspective, it would be a way--maybe the only way--of delivering a 64bit desktop that wouldn't kill Itanium, nor Itanium's "profit" margins.

We can almost declare Yamhill dead. It would already have developers working on it and rumors all over the place if it were really on the map for 2004--NDA or not. And AMD64 compatibility is just not Intel's style.

And this is all assuming that the rumor is true :) But we should expect to hear alot more from Intel re:64bit desktops soon in any case.