Replies to post #27543 on Advanced Micro Devices Inc (AMD)

[KeithDust2000]

wbmw, it was the most central argument of you and the other posters I mentioned that AMD64 is a bad idea and would fail in the marketplace. Now that Microsoft and INTEL are supporting it, that was obviously wrong. Of course the transition will take time, no one ever doubted that. Even if most of the transition would only happen in 2006, you would all still be wrong about AMD64 failing like 3dnow. Longhorn´s 64bit support is actually proof of AMD64´s success.

And AMD64 also has a lot of technical and business merit, and that was the argument, nothing else.

I think you are a very poor sport by claiming my arguments were just wishful thinking. INTEL didn´t choose AMD64 because of my wishful thinking. It seems to me you´re trying to weasel out of your predictions.

[jhalada]

wbmw,

Fast forward to today, and 64-bits is still irrelevant on the desktop, not to mention mobile. This will be the case until at least Longhorn, which will service >95% of desktop OS market share, supports it and the required drivers. Longhorn is what? 2006 now?

Actually, I probably agree, but the word irrelevant is a little strong. Someone has to serve the first 1% of early adopters, then 2nd 1% etc. - I am glad it is AMD. That's a more natural progression than 0% now, and 100% when Intel says at the end of the decade.

Joe

[UpNDown]

wbmw, on Longhorn

Just to offer my opinion on this, I think Longhorn is just smoke. Windows XP-64 will be the Microsoft desktop 64-bit operating system for quite a while. Longhorn will be one incredibly receding deadline after another. The release of Windows XP-64 beta is the big break here -- you don't have to buy a new operating system right off, so I think we'll see a lot of game manufacturers (note: I don't do gaming) introduce product to run on the beta, and not wait until normal release. ATI has to be brave enough to freely release their drivers, that seems to be the last sticking point. They're dumb not to go with a more open beta. Then one game release would be all it takes to start the ball rolling. Gamers don't mind having an extra disk sitting around for the new stuff...

[kpf]

wbmw

Fast forward to today, and 64-bits is still irrelevant on the desktop, not to mention mobile.

Assuming you are referring to current applications, I agree.

However, from an economic viewpoint 64bits are relevant at the time they play a role in buying decisions.

This will be the case until at least Longhorn, which will service >95% of desktop OS market share, supports it and the required drivers. Longhorn is what? 2006 now?

I agree on this navigational waypoint. So, second half of 2006 is about after half of the useful life for a System purchased this year. Which makes a perfect leverage to switch over to a 64-bit operating system by then.

Thats why I believe 64-bit is highly relevant already today for educated users - I would hope this rationale will kick in for corporate purchases already this year. For the consumer side I am confident that as word spreads that 64 bit promises benefits for gaming and video stuff you bet 32bit will become a no-no very soon for gaming kids. As soon as that, publishers will have little choice to tout this horn.

WRT to elmer, i sure hope he will be continued to be proven wrong with his hypothesis that AMD will fail to deliver on the manufacturing side (again) with K8. They did not in the current node - although the progress is far less impressive as with their 180nm copper process in 2000 when they doubled clockrates within a year or so. Very much more unimpressive on the yield side, but that is no miracle with more layers and larger die on SoI.

Actually, i guess elmer would have been pretty right on the manufacturability of K8 (at least in the current node) if AMD had not designed lots of redundancy mechanism into K8 - what elmer did not know, at least he never mentioned this turf even when asked about.

K.