InvestorsHub Logo
Followers 0
Posts 625
Boards Moderated 0
Alias Born 03/25/2004

Re: chipguy post# 56163

Thursday, 05/19/2005 7:15:32 PM

Thursday, May 19, 2005 7:15:32 PM

Post# of 97796
Chipguy:

Your revisions of history are typical when your company fails to meet the original targets. Itanium was to be released at only 600MHz. Here is a story from 1999 by the Register that states that HP had 800MHz as the original target, but that current samples barely make 400MHz: http://www.theregister.co.uk/1999/12/17/merced_slow_slow_quick_quick/ Just one month before: http://www.theregister.co.uk/1999/11/15/first_merceditanium_systems_get_cobbled/ For more on 1999 see: http://home.swipnet.se/~w-10554/intel_news_1999.html

Oh the original target wasn't 1GHz. Yeah right!

Here is an older look: http://www.theregister.co.uk/1998/10/15/intel_doctors_foster_to_extend/

This states that Merced was to be over 1GHz and that McKinley and Madison would be each higher than the previous incarnation. The names were kept, but the time was delayed by 2.5 years at lower speeds: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2001/08/29/mckinley_deerfield_speeds_and_feeds/

As each generation came out, Itanium release speeds were scaled back. This didn't damp speed speculations by Intel boosters that were initially high until near launch, when reality set in. Montecito's are now down to 1.6-1.8GHz.

Pete

Volume:
Day Range:
Bid:
Ask:
Last Trade Time:
Total Trades:
  • 1D
  • 1M
  • 3M
  • 6M
  • 1Y
  • 5Y
Recent AMD News