Originally posted by herbivore
I don't think that I would necessarily put much faith in AMD right now. Their theoretical SPEC numbers look good compared with the 970, but with the amount of cash AMD is hemorrhaging, they will struggle to keep up with IBM and Intel in scaling their chips.
Actually, though AMD is making a loss they are in apparently good financial position:http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=8982
Especially the last paragraph; "AMD could be considered to be cash rich..."
How is it so? Well how is it that Apple has a reported $4 billion in cash after making hugh losses in the '90s and has only been making modest profits since then?
AMD also just signed up as a partner with IBM to work on process tech together. I presume AMD will also get IBM to fab some of their chips as part of this deal since IBM is looking for work to fill its fabs.
Intel is stuck with 32 bit [...] HPaq [...] to see the Itanic succeed [...] Gateway is a skeleton [...] Dell is the only real hope that AMD and its Opteron has. Intel will ensure that Dell stays in the Pentium/Itanium fold by ensuring that HPaq otherwise gets preferred pricing on all Pentium, Itanium and Centrino processors.
IBM is not small player in x86 and are reportedly going in with both hands and feet using Opteron chips. Dell is also a likely customer, contrary to what you think.
I really see the Opteron as a dead duck and a last gasp effort by AMD to maintain market relevancy.
A short sighted statement that might only have strength if AMD had started development last year as their market share began to fall again. However, AMD started work on the K8 years
ago, when their market share was going up
so it is not a last gasp effort as you say. They company does depend on its success but all reports say it will be very competetive with the P4 and Xeon chips.
IBM itself feels that AMD's days are limited.
No they don't of they wouldn't be planning to use their chips or have signed a partnership agreement.
Intel will simply price their 32 bit chips so low that AMD won't be able to compete.
No so. AMD's Opteron and Athlon 64 dies are small. On the same process the A64 is small than a P4 and can hence be cheaper to produce. The Opteron is smaller than an Itanic by far so it can be much cheaper - price performance wise it will hit Itanic for six.
The Opteron might gain a small percentage of the market share with a few pro users who need 64 bit power with backwards 32 bit compatibility, but it is a small market at this point. Intel can mercilessly cut AMD to ribbons which is happening in front of our very eyes.
No they can't. AMD has much room to spare with their Barton core and it competes well with the P4. If A64 has some startup woes they will introduce faster AthlonXPs to stay in touch with Intel. The big point is, and the same goes for the 970, it is not so much 'backwards compatible' with 32 bit but natively
32 bit with native
64 bit capability too.
Pro applications that need a 64 bit processor will be ported to Itanium as Intel and HPaq will see to it.
And to Opteron. IBM's DB2, Oracle, etc. No small fry in 64-bit land.
Absolutely not true at all.
Intel will be more than happy to provide both [a P4 and Itanic] for less than the cost of a single AMD Opteron.
See above. AMD has the upper hand with respect to pricing. Itanics cost thousands of dollars! See this article:http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=8900
"The distributor price for the Model 240 is $275, for the 242 $670..."
Pentiums 4 don't even sell for that price.http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=8907
"A 3GHz PENTIUM 4 for a Canterwood will cost $415..."
I am glad Apple chose to partner up with IBM.
So am I. I think the 970 will be excellent for Apple and I think that IBM will follow on with derivatives of the 970 and then the Power5 and really give them the hardware to match OS X.
But business being business, the best solution doesn't always win.
This is an argument against the 970 as much as the Opteron. Neither currently have market share. Both perform well (or are expected to) against competitors.
So realistically it is the 9x0 series vs. the Itanic series.
No, it's the Power series vs the Itanic. Those two families are aimed at different markets than the 970 and it's successors.
The Prescott has no realistic chance of competing either. It will be at a serious disadvantage in a laptop and won't be able to run 64 bit pro apps.
The Prescott is starting on 90 nm and will come in a mobile version but the Pentium M is Intel's real mobile chip anyway.
Still, I will wait for Apple's 970 machines.
Yes, so will I. I'm sick of what MS is trying to force me to do via the Window's platform and will become a switcher as soon as I decide to upgrade my Athlon 1.2 GHz machine I got in 2000 and 2001. I'm planning a PowerBook too - a 970 PB would be nice.
I'll get to have the best OS on a viable platform that will scale quickly with IBM's commitment to take on Intel with the PowerPC line of chips.
Yes but the competition will be:
970 vs Pentium4 family and
Power vs Itanium
I still think you underestimate AMD and the 'hammer' line.