Replies to post #26413 on Advanced Micro Devices Inc (AMD)

[sgolds]

wbmw, if you think Intel will role the dice and ship without seeing if their implementation works on a variety of outside sites, so be it. It wouldn't be the first time they rushed something to market before it was ready, under pressure from AMD. (Think MTH, 1GHz PIII, P4EE.)

IA32E? I don't think the public will buy the notion that 64 bits isn't really 64 bits because of the name. Particularly when one considers the potential Itanium buyer, who will know that IA32E = AMD64. Unless it isn't - do you think they did a partial implementation (subset)?

[jhalada]

wbmw,

I don't see IA32E as anything more than new instructions, like SSE-x. The "beta" has been around for months, and it was called "Opteron".

I hope you are joking. If not, then I must have overestimated your understanding of issues. First of all, IA32e is an idiotic marketing term, AMD64 is a non-idiotic marketing term, so let's not call it by an idiotic name, and call it either x86-64 or AMD64. Mainly, because it is a full fledged 64 bit instruction set. Comparing it to SSEx, well, I hope you are joking, and I am not going to comment further.

Joe