Replies to post #25642 on Advanced Micro Devices Inc (AMD)

[Mysef]

What is the dead half of the Prescott for?
Surely an Intel employee like yourself would know.
Mysef

[InternetPlay]

Semi,

it appears, that if AMD wants to make a full blown 64 bit chip at some time in the future, they will need to develop their own proprietery design. If they're working on it...

I am very disappointed at you as I think you are a smart person. Now tell me why AMD will need to develop it's own proprietery design when Itanium is going to obsolete? AMD is not a suicidal teenager. The money to be made by AMD is not in the big tin, but down below... And educate me if I am wrong - Opteron clusters are taking away some market from the big tin.

[sgolds]

SemiconEng -

...if AMD wants to make a full blown 64 bit chip at some time in the future, they will need to develop their own proprietery design. If they're working on it, How far along do you think AMD is?

Considering that they've been shipping a full blown 64-bit processor since last April, I'd say they are very far along on it.

Oh - you said proprietary. Silly me. Why would they want to do that?

:)

[Dan3]

Re: if AMD wants to make a full blown 64 bit chip at some time in the future, they will need to develop their own proprietery design. If they're working on it, How far along do you think AMD is?

Boy oh boy oh boy oh boy have you ever not been paying attention!

AMD hasn't just been developing a full blown 64-bit chip, they've been shipping it!

And IBM is ALREADY selling rackmount servers based upon AMD's full blown 64-bit chip!

And SUN is migrating their line of servers, and their full blown 64-bit Solaris operating system and suite of full blown 64-bit applications to AMD's full blown 64-bit chip!

Better yet, AMD's full blown 64-bit chip, despite being a new architecture with many new general purpose registers (the big failing of Intel's design) can still run 32-bit Operating systems and 32-bit binary executables at speeds faster than Intel's best 32-bit chips!

In fact, AMD's year old, full blown 64-bit chip, is such a spectacularly good design, that its backwards compatibility features execute 32-bit code faster than Intel's brand new 32-bit chip on Intel's brand new 90nm process.

And AMD's year old, full blown 64-bit chip is even faster when running full blown 64-bit code!

And AMD's year old, full blown 64-bit chip offers superior software security from hardware features than will be activated in the next Windows service pack.

And AMD's year old, full blown 64-bit chip provides all of these features, all of this compatibility, and all of this security PLUS much lower power consumption allowing it to deliver quieter, longer lasting, and more reliable systems than Intel can provide since AMD's advanced SOI process and advanced "Cool and Quiet" hardware management system reduce power requirements even in such a powerfull series of chips. The most likely points of failure in any computer system are the ones with moving parts, so reducing the dependency on fans, etc. by reducing heat dissipation is the best way to increase reliability.

And AMD's year old, full blown 64-bit chip is less than 2 quarters away from a big boost from AMD's upcoming 90nm process.

And AMD has been working on the follow on for a couple of years, now!

Must be quite a bit of news for you!

I'm surprised you hadn't heard of it, yet!

Maybe you should do a litte catching up before you post again.

[j3pflynn]

Semi - re:"So, it appears, that if AMD wants to make a full blown 64 bit chip at some time in the future, they will need to develop their own proprietery design. If they're working on it, How far along do you think AMD is?"

Why would you think they'd want to go down that path? Besides, would you care to share how you'd define full blown 64 bit chip?
Paul

[yourbankruptcy]

Semi, what's the point to implement IA-64 instruction set at all? It's a dead end. You won't suggest AMD to implement Alpha instruction set, for example, do you? How IA-64 is different?

Intel may do whatever they want with IPF processors, they can put 24 Mb of cache there, nobody care. 2003 was the year of Itanium.