Author: David Wilke
Date: 06:04:37 01/18/01
Go up one level in this thread
On January 17, 2001 at 23:21:19, Dann Corbit wrote: >On January 17, 2001 at 22:52:22, David Wilke wrote: >>On January 17, 2001 at 17:59:25, Gian-Carlo Pascutto wrote: >> >>>On January 17, 2001 at 17:47:34, John Dahlem wrote: >>> >>>>Are these new 64 bit processors just for servers, or are they going to replace >>>>32 bit processors within 1-3 years? >>> >>>Pretty much any new processor Intel introduced was aimed >>>at 'servers only' in the beginning. However, home users >>>always want the latest and the fastest so no doubt they >>>will be on the desktop soon...Unless the price is really >>>outrageous. >>> >>>-- >>>GCP >> >>Intel has outragous prices? Say it isn't so... :) >> >>Intel is going to lose the processor war. Athlon can easily compete, and is the >>cheaper solution. Someone should wake up the marketing idiots at Intel and get >>them on the ball. > >Athlon does not compete with Itanium. There is no VLM model with Athlon. The >direct competition for Itanium is Compaq's Alpha chip. > >If you have some database that needs 12 gigabytes of physical ram and 100 TB of >virtual memory, how will you address information with Athlon? It is outside of >the address space. > >The 64 bit address space and 64 bit native operations are unique to those two >(and a smattering of other chips that nobody will ever care about). I was talking about the current PIII vs the Athlon.. I know the Athlon does not have a 64 bit processor.. yet.. I wasn't comparing the Itanium vs Athlon. I was making a quip about the mention that Intel was possibly overpriced.
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.