Replies to post #1943 on AMD strictly moderated (AMD)

[cruzbay]

"How about the $140B market I2 is in of which Intel's share is $20B?"

Let's see, at an average of $1000 per CPU, that would peg Itanium units at 20 million a year. I don't even think IDC got it that wrong. So,

Sputter, puff: "YOU... YOU ARE NOT EVEN WRONG!!!"

[bobs10]

you...

Still can't get over that, huh? Did'ja see the recent article on how all the OEMs are going to I2? Probably not. How about the $10B? Probably not. How about the $140B market I2 is in of which Intel's share is $20B? Guess not.

BTW, it wasn't I2 where they got their lead, it was Intel staying with netburst.

me...

I'm sure AMD is thrilled that INTC continues to invest heavily in Itanium. The way INTC has the market split between Xeon and Itanium leaves the heart of the server market to AMD, which it is taking more and more of. After HPQ there's a rather short list of Itanium supporters of which IBM and DELL are notably absent.

Wrong, INTC never had a X86-64 back-up plan, and had to eventually adopt AMD's AMD64 when MSFT said they wouldn't support another INTC 64 bit standard besides Itanium. Netburst was a bust because it sacrificed power in the name of the speed god at a time when IPC and low-power were becoming standards.