• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

HP stepping away from Itanium

It's nice to see that after 6 long years the Xeon EX family is taking over Itanium's place on the product line up.
 
Wow... the "Itanic" processors are still around? I thought that product line got canned years ago when Microsoft and Red Hat stopped doing new server versions for it.
 
Last edited:
Oracle made their own mistake with Sparc tho 😉

There can be only one, and thats x86. The problem is its not the ideal choice. And we will most likely never see a new uarch again as long as there is competition of any kind. Simple risk vs reward economic factor.
 
ShintaiDK said:
Oracle made their own mistake with Sparc tho 😉

There can be only one, and thats x86. The problem is its not the ideal choice. And we will most likely never see a new uarch again as long as there is competition of any kind. Simple risk vs reward economic factor.
Click to expand...

It's clear x86 is the practical choice. What would you consider as the ideal choice?
 
Idontcare said:
Actually this means that Oracle was right all along, and the lawsuit brought on by HP was complete BS.
Click to expand...

Probably at least one side benefit from this from Oracle's point of view is that they scared people away from Itanium quicker than might otherwise would have happened.

Hard to prove the counter-factual though.
 
kimmel said:
Probably at least one side benefit from this from Oracle's point of view is that they scared people away from Itanium quicker than might otherwise would have happened.
Click to expand...

POWER, SPARC and Itanium are dying, there isn't much anyone can do about it.
 
ShintaiDK said:
Its all about R&D budget.
Click to expand...

Haha, no. Itanium was Intel's great white hope. They poured billions upon billions into it. They predicted tens of billions in yearly sales.

Itanium_Sales_Forecasts_edit.png


It was a bad idea.
 
NTMBK said:
Haha, no. Itanium was Intel's great white hope. They poured billions upon billions into it. They predicted tens of billions in yearly sales.

It was a bad idea.
Click to expand...

The amount spend vs x86 is tiny at best.

IA64 died due to x64. The shortcut was yet again taken and we won another 30-40 years with legacy and workarounds.

Your graph is also misleading. The first IA64 CPU launched in 2001. And it was clear in 2004 that it was a lost cause due to x64. Just look at the product releases since that time. From 1 year to 3 year schedules.
 
Last edited:
NTMBK said:
Haha, no. Itanium was Intel's great white hope. They poured billions upon billions into it. They predicted tens of billions in yearly sales.

Itanium_Sales_Forecasts_edit.png


It was a bad idea.
Click to expand...

It was a bad idea, badly implemented, and even the anticipation of it made development of certain better designs essentially stop. Good riddance.
 
Intel17 said:
I don't know why...maybe the IA64 ISA is great, but the implementations of that ISA have been dogs.
Click to expand...
No, the IA64 ISA isn't great. I really wanted to like it, but it's too complex and puts too much emphasis on compiler ability to generate good code for a quite complex ISA.
 
ShintaiDK said:
The amount spend vs x86 is tiny at best.
Click to expand...

It is now, yes, because it has been abandoned as a lost cause. But not when they initially developed Itanium. They poured billions into it instead of developing their own x86-64 extensions, and lost out when AMD did the obvious thing and extended the market's preferred ISA.

Itanium was just flat out awful. Ding, dong, the witch is dead.
 
NTMBK said:
It is now, yes, because it has been abandoned as a lost cause. But not when they initially developed Itanium. They poured billions into it instead of developing their own x86-64 extensions, and lost out when AMD did the obvious thing and extended the market's preferred ISA.
Click to expand...

So tell me, how much R&D money was used on Itanium and how much on x86. Something like Haswell alone for example most likely cost more than the entire Itanium project.

And x64 was a terrible hotfix solution to the real problem ahead. And you should know that by now.

IA64 was the last risk you ever see before a complete CPU monopoly across all segments.
 
Last edited:
Nothingness said:
No, the IA64 ISA isn't great. I really wanted to like it, but it's too complex and puts too much emphasis on compiler ability to generate good code for a quite complex ISA.
Click to expand...

You are not going to get 12+ issue wide cores without that. People already complain about progression with x86 now. Today we have no alternative to x86.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top