• 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.

Intel Secretly Stepping up Development of x86-64(AMD) Compatible Processors on News of Bad IA-64 Sales

A

AGodspeed

Diamond Member
[/i]Link

Intel has a secret skunk works in Beaverton, US, developing X86-64 compatible processors, the INQUIRER believes.

EDIT: ***Confirmed*** 😉
 
I'm a bit hesitant to believe that "rumour", but let me just say I wouldn't be surprised in the least to see Intel "experimenting" with x86-64. IA64 has been, well, less than successful. Consumers don't want $4000 CPUs with all new "64-bit" software. And the old addage that 64-bit would only be useful in a server / corporate arena has been disproven.
 
nvidia always has a team of engineers trying to figure out what the other guys are doing and how they're doing it, why can't intel?
 
It's just kinda hilarious to sit back and watch Intel play 'follow the leader' ... likely not a familiar position for them. Of course, AMD has had their share of innovations over the years, but lately... x86-64 has been in development with some big names for quite some time. They (Intel) would be foolish to ignore the vast majority of the market who don't desire to immediately invest in hundreds (thousands?) of dollars in new 64-bit software. And please, no wise cracks about IA64 being "able" to run 32-bit code. I don't think the consumer would accept 486ish execution performance out of an expensive, top-end CPU. 😀

I can see it already... a new 64-bit 'consumer' flavor chip from Intel ... with SOI and x86-64 architecture 😀
 


<< AMD FOREVER 😉
Intel will die someday and them it will be cyrix VS AMD and we all know who wins.... >>



Yeah I can see it now -> AMD chip triple in price overnight.
 
Am I the only one that thinks that this story is full of sh!t? I mean, I could smell it even before I clicked on the thread.

OTOH, Intel is supposedly tucking their tail between their legs to support HyperTransport so they don't get left behind 😉
 


<< Am I the only one that thinks that this story is full of sh!t? >>

No. 🙂

While it's probable that Intel has a 64-bit extension to x86 planned as a backup, it's unlikely that they'll use x86-64. After all, it has probably been in development since before the x86-64 ISA was released. But if that is the case, and they are working on it right now, I find it impossible that the Inquirer knows about it. Their only proof?

<< Intel has a secret skunk works in Beaverton, US, developing X86-64 compatible processors, the INQUIRER believes. >>

I think I've lost all respect for that publication....
 


<< Am I the only one that thinks that this story is full of sh!t? >>

No, you aren't the only one. 🙂
 
Dark4ng3l,

.

<< Intel will die someday and them it will be cyrix VS AMD and we all know who wins.... >>



Be carefull what you wish for, there is no difference between having an Intel monopoly and an AMD one. If Intel were not around AMD would screw us all in a heartbeat
 
You have a forbidden word in your message post. Please click the back button in your browser and remove this word from your post. The words that are forbidden are highlighted for you.


Yeah AMD zelots are pretty rediculous. If Intel went under, AMD would be ripping each and every one of us off. That and the fact that they couldn't supply enough chips and resellers/oems would jack prices sky high (ebay type price war) and/or AMD would raise the rates through the roof. Actually i would LOVE to see this happen now that you talk about it. OEM's like Dell, IBM, HP/Compaq would all get dibs on chips. AMD wouldnt be able to supply enough chips and that would leave resellers out of chips, and ever AT person left to buy OEM. Now THAT would be freakin hillarious. I'd love to see the whinning going on when you couldnt buy a chip. Classic

It's just lame that the same people who were using their brand new Pentium 2 that overclocked to 400mhz (and they were so happy and proud and told the world), now hate the company. All in 2 years??? People can be such backstabbing retards.....wait a second, just like companies can be! Yeah let Intel go under, so we can see what your precious AMD does 🙂 How can rumors be confirmed? No one really knows what Intel has going on. Theres a chance they could have been doing this for years and you'd never known. Or theres a chance this article is full of sh!t.

bandwaggon people have been ***confirmed****
 
All I know is 640k is enough for anyone....

So as far as these processors goes and their 4 gig plus RAM and their huge caches blah blah blah! ALL YOU NEED is 640k!
 


<<

<< Am I the only one that thinks that this story is full of sh!t? >>

No, you aren't the only one. 🙂 >>



I think it is not true. It is too late for Intel to change anything

First AMD's patent connected with Hammer is dated June, 1998. And we won't see many system with it till 2003. It is 5! years of development.

By 2006 Intel's EPIC will be look much better then x86-64. Not matter what performance Itanium showed so far it is a great architecture. And it will show good performance in the long run.

Furtunately AMD x86-64 looks very good in the short-run 😉

p.s. Don't forget than IBM, Compaq, HP, SGI agreed thet EPIC is better than the architecture they use (RISC) in the long run. That means something.
 
Oh boy, the Inquirer said something, so it must be true.
Sorry, but I have to pass that one up in the checkout line.

Monopolies suck! Cyrix as a monopoly would suck beyound suck! 😉
 
<<Furtunately AMD x86-64 looks very good in the short-run>>

We hear that about the P4. What would you rather have now, great performance now or a long wait?
 


<< <<Furtunately AMD x86-64 looks very good in the short-run>>

We hear that about the P4. What would you rather have now, great performance now or a long wait? >>



This is not AMD vs Intel thread. I have AMD system and i love it. The question is will Intel copy AMD x86-64 arhitecture or not? The answer is NO! Intel's EPIC has much more features. It is not ready for prime time (and it won't be for 3-5 years), but it is absolutely awesome. AMD's x86-64 looks very good for filling up this 3-5 years 🙂
 
Nobody said it was a "This is not AMD vs Intel thread", nor did I bash Intel. The simple policy of Intel to promise "future performance" is ludicrous. They expect people to pay for functions that go unused in an effort to lure them to their processors. The benchmarks are fairly split between the top processors from each company, making them fairly even trades. However, Intel promises that the P4 is going to be something it is not.

IA-64 has almost no software support and has more units delivered "free" than at cost, if rumours hold true. The IA-64 processor is working so well they are giving them all away! 😉
 
So it would be better if the producers of CPUs and chipsets just concentrated on making the present crop of software run better instead of developing hardware that could run more advanced software paradigms?

- Collin
 
I find it hard to believe that intel, who spent 10 years developing their 64bit chip, is just going to throw it away and start a new one. That is a lot of resources, and money being thrown away, and it'd be much better for them to push their own chip, then to conceed.

Seems like BS to me.
 
I'd read this link. It gives you a good idea of the problems Intel had/has been having with getting experienced engineers. Apparently very few "experienced" engineers were involved in IA-64.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top