• 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.

HyperTransport sucks, PCI-E is better, BOO Hypertransport **A Few Years Later**

Yay. Anyone feel that this will end up like the MicroChannel bus architecture?

The worst part is, HT, as I understand it, is a fairly "open" standard. A lot of silicon design firms are designing parts with native HT interface "glue" on them. If Intel goes through with this, it will really cost the little guys in terms of support two high-speed glue-logic interfaces. I think that's basically the point though - if Intel, which is still the "big dog" in the market, comes out with their own standard, many of these smaller chipmakers (think things like bridge chips, GigE chips, SCSI chips, etc., with a native HT interface on them) will be forced to support the majority of the market, which would entail dropping HT, and embracing whatever standard Intel comes up with.

Unless Intel is "too little, too late" with this, and I hope that they are.
 
Originally posted by: Sqube
That is so incredibly fvcking stupid.
Click to expand...
You have to wonder if that si really the case here. After reading this
Intel Corp. shares edged higher Friday after the company tightened its first-quarter sales and gross margin forecasts to the high end of its previous estimates, crediting stronger-than-expected demand for its chips and lower startup costs associated with a new technology.
Click to expand...
it occured to me the reason their start-up costs for the new tech was so low is that they just canabalized what they got from AMD! Perhaps they will rip-off hypertransport without compromising themselves and premier their own version for pennies on the dollar of what doing it from scratch would have cost 😉 It is pure evil genius, they must have retained V.P. Dick Cheney as a consultant 😛
 
Well it might make sense from a financial standpoint, but there's no common-sensical reason to re-invent the wheel.

That's how it seems to me, anyway.
 
Here. The straight 1 vs 41 match

Intel vs..

AMD
Agilent
ALi
Alliance Semiconductor
Altera
Apple
Artisan Components
ATi
Broadcom
Cisco
CPU Technology
Cray
Credence
Dolphin Technology
Fabric7
FuturePlus
GDA Technologies
HDL Design House
Hifn
IBM
Iwill
LSI Logic
LTX
Mindshare
Mitsui Zosen Systems Research
NEC
Network Appliance
Newisys
nVidia
PathScale
PLX
PMC-Sierra
RMI
Renesas
Sis
Sun
TI
Triolin
Uli
Via
Xilinx
 
Originally posted by: dullard
Originally posted by: Azzy64
lol, way to go at pissing off a load of big name companies, intel 😀
Click to expand...
How does this harm any of them at all?
Click to expand...

maybe not harm... but if they had intel supporting them, they would have a much bigger budget and recognition etc unless i am wrong in thinking how this 'consortium' works :S
 
Originally posted by: Sqube
Well it might make sense from a financial standpoint, but there's no common-sensical reason to re-invent the wheel.

That's how it seems to me, anyway.
Click to expand...
Looking at the way Intel can jump on tech late in the game and still make big bank off of it, more than the innovators, I am certain they of of the opinion of "fvck common sense" 😉

Hey Ribbon, the problem with your match-up is that it won't amount to much in the desktop and server markets where Intel already has a big slice of the pie in most every area they compete in 😉 It isn't like they are trying to innovate from scratch, The 41 did most the hard work already, all Intc has to do is tweak it, implement it, and keep outselling rival solutions in those very same markets. They are like Beloc from Raiders of Lost Ark, whatever they possess, Intc can take away 😛 😉
 
Maybe they're going to go all Rambus on everyone - "Hah, see? We had the patent on it way before any of you guys started using it! We want royalties!!!!"

Just admit it already, guys. Heck, AMD uses your instructions, and uses the names on their chips. Yeah, they also came up with their own, but they are doing quite well, and they are somewhat different in what they do. But they don't have AMD Super-Media-Translation-Instructions. They have "SSE" and "SSE2."


Heck, why not go with Hypertransport. Hyperthreading and Hypertransport for a hyperactive experience!!!! Where's Intel's marketing department now???? 😀
 
To bad Hewlett-Packard isn't a member of the HT Consortium. They could easily quash any efforts by Intel, by thier financial might alone. The largest member of the consortium is Cisco.
 
I don't follow you Jeff, AMD indeed uses Intel stuff but doesn't think up a new name for it or say it is "different" or do they? examples?. Hypertransport obviously isn't just an AMD tech, and there was no reason Intc couldn't join and contribute. They are doing this to maintain the appearance of being a tech innovator, in this case ala "anything you can do, I can do better". They Poo Poo everything AMD does then follow suit but with some serious spin involved! I am unaware of AMD pulling the copy&spin it like we didn't routine, so I welcome any examples of it 🙂
 
Originally posted by: ribbon13
To bad Hewlett-Packard isn't a member of the HT Consortium. They could easily quash any efforts by Intel, by thier financial might alone. The largest member of the consortium is Cisco.
Click to expand...
I haven't done the reasearch, is Cisco really bigger than corps like IBM and SIS?

 
Originally posted by: mooncancook
i like Hyper Transport... sounds like space traveling
Click to expand...
I like mooncancook, sounds like Yan can cook and he is awesome with knifes and cleavers 😛 :roll:

 
Originally posted by: DAPUNISHER
Originally posted by: mooncancook
i like Hyper Transport... sounds like space traveling
Click to expand...
I like mooncancook, sounds like Yan can cook and he is awesome with knifes and cleavers 😛 :roll:
Click to expand...

[chinese accent]my chinese food is MORE BETTER than his [/chinese accent]

 
I doubt this has anything to do with AMD. Intel is only bringing it out in 2007 and only on Itanium and Xeon. If it were a response to AMD, what's the point of waiting so long and what about desktops?

Won't Intel be using dual and multiple front side buses? I'm sure I read that somewhere around AT.
 
Originally posted by: LTC8K6
I doubt this has anything to do with AMD. Intel is only bringing it out in 2007 and only on Itanium and Xeon. If it were a response to AMD, what's the point of waiting so long and what about desktops?

Won't Intel be using dual and multiple front side buses? I'm sure I read that somewhere around AT.
Click to expand...
According to Josh "Intel is creating their own CSI standard to connect next generation Itaniums and Xeons together in multiprocessing environments, as well as utilize this technology to connect their processors to their northbridges and southbridges." That sounds to me like it'll apply to all their chipsets before they are done.

As to the question "If it were a response to AMD, what's the point of waiting so long" Just like 64bit, they see if it pans out, and if it is better than what they have going, then implemet it if it is. Obviously they develope along many lines at once, and this stuff is always ready to get pushed forward and used if it looks like the best option.

 
Originally posted by: Sqube
Well it might make sense from a financial standpoint, but there's no common-sensical reason to re-invent the wheel. That's how it seems to me, anyway.
Click to expand...
You would think so, but MS has shown the possibilities of getting rich by "embrace and extend" behaviors, take something common and standardized, and then make it proprietary and expensive. (I'm truely glad that MS isn't in charge of vehicle or household electrical standards.) I guess perhaps Intel is taking a page out of MS's playbook now.
Edit: The good thing here is, Intel's tacit acknowledgement that their current bus-sharing arrangement for their lower-end MP systems is archaic, backwards-thinking, and slow. Competition is good!
 
Hey Larry, do you know what software "smart homes" use? Scary thought eh? 😛
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top