Replies to post #50598 on Advanced Micro Devices Inc (AMD)

[wmbz]

Chipguy, you're still contradicting yourself. Don't you see that if Intel had long term plans for x86 like you say why then did they have to copy AMD64? Long term would have meant that they would have planned for a 64-bit version themselves. So, you see, it's you who doesn't understand your own statements.


C

[jhalada]

chipguy,

The poster I responded claimed that
Intel planned to drop x86 in favour of IPF but was only
stopped by AMD64's success. The public roadmap
evidence I described clearly shows that Intel had long
term x86 development plans in 1997, long before IPF
shipped and long before AMD announced AMD64 let
alone garnered OEM support for it.

You can twist this all you want, Intel did plan to drop x86 by keeping it 32 bit only. Natural progression to 64 bit would kill it.

It didn't happen that way because AMD gave life to 64 bit x86 and Itanium has turned out to be noncompetitive as an overall package (price, timing, execution, software support).

Joe