May 22nd, 2002, 06:58 PM
AMD set to steal Itanium's thunder
Today's focus: AMD set to steal Itanium's thunder
> By Deni Connor
> AMD appears set to make some headway with its Opteron chipset
> when it launches the first half of next year.
> The 64-bit chipset, which will run 32-bit applications equally
> as well, received approving nods from such industry heavyweight
> leaders as Michael Dell, Bill Gates and Scott McNealy, as a
> replacement for Intel's two-year late Itanium processor.
> Earlier this year at Merrill Lynch's Hardware Heaven conference
> Michael Dell boosted AMD's chances in the server marketplace by
> saying that his company was very interested and looking at
> Sun also is rumored to be interested in using AMD's Opteron
> processor for the multiprocessor computers it will manufacture.
> And Microsoft has planned extensions to Windows that would
> allow it to run on 64-bit platforms.
> Opteron, also dubbed SledgeHammer, is a one- to eight-way
> processor that will ship in the first half of 2003. It succeeds
> the AMD Clawhammer, the first processor with x86-64 technology,
> which will ship in the second half of this year.
> x86-64 is a native 64-bit technology that supports both 32- and
> 64-bit applications without performance or feature compromises.
> AMD says that its Hammer platform with debut at speeds as great
> as 2 GHz.
> Users polled by Network World on the HP/Compaq acquisition told
> us that they wanted to see an alternative to Itanium. While
> most of them would have preferred that that alternative was the
> Alpha processors, several mentioned AMD's Opteron or an
> unofficial project Intel is rumored to have called Yamhill,
> which uses x86-64 bit technology.
> At least one company, Newisys, is known to be using AMD's
> Opteron chipset. Newisys, located in Austin, Texas, is made up
> primarily of former IBM engineers, and is developing 64-bit
> servers for Windows 2000 and Linux. It is making single- and
> two-way symmetrical multiprocessing servers through 8-way
> servers. Newisys is funded by AMD and Austin Ventures, as well
> as some private investors.
> To contact Deni Connor:
> Deni Connor is a senior editor at Network World covering
> storage, SANs, Novell and Novell-related products. You can
> reach her at mailto:email@example.com
Mankind have a great aversion to intellectual labor; but even supposing knowledge to be easily attainable, more people would be content to be ignorant than would take even a little trouble to acquire it.
- Samuel Johnson
May 22nd, 2002, 08:13 PM
Go AMD. It's about time...
America - Land of the free, home of the brave.
May 22nd, 2002, 08:23 PM
I certainly like the idea of competition. It always brings down prices. It might be a little while before they get into the market full swing though. If I'm wrong and they can do as well as they did in the 32 bit processor market, we may be seeing cheap 64 bit processors as soon as next year. I hope I'm wrong.
May 22nd, 2002, 08:54 PM
May 22nd, 2002, 09:15 PM
It'd be nice to see somebody step up and challenge Intel and make the entire market a little more affordable and more innovative.
May 22nd, 2002, 10:37 PM
Right on AMD. They've taken a back seat in the server market for to long.
Its not software piracy. Iím just making multiple off site backups.
May 23rd, 2002, 12:51 AM
Korp.. i love the post and i am all for AMD..
but i hate those little ">" signs..
don't hate me for this but haven't you ever heard of little
cleaner apps that take out all those obnoxious ">" symbols ?
here's one..self executable (no install) ,spyware,trojan,virus free)
May 23rd, 2002, 03:10 AM
I have a question, how long has the 64-bit architecture been around?
Anyway, right on AMD
May 23rd, 2002, 03:32 AM
hmmmm.. since the cave men found out two set's of choppers were better than one ?
how long has the 64-bit architecture been around?
no, ibm has had it for years.. as well as others.. but not for consumer use.
i'm not an ibm'er but i work (as a contractor) there.. and i found out that they had a 32bit processor back in the days when intel had it's 286 out and couldn't make production shipments.. they had ibm fab and test their stuff (on my test systems) while ibm was secretly making their own.. but.. dumb ass ibm.. they squashed their own project thinking that they didn't want to generate competition for their higher end stuff..
their marketing folks really didn't have a clue.. they coulda blown intel off the map.
May 23rd, 2002, 04:34 AM
I have always been with AMD...