Options
Intel Prescott Already Has 64-bit Extensions
The guys over at [link=http://www.xbitlabs.com]Xbitlabs[/link] seem to have got wind of the fact that Intel's next-generation CPU, code named 'Prescott', does in fact have 64-bit extensions. However, it appears for some reason Intel has no plans to enable them.
[blockquote]Apparently, the extensions may be a part of the well-known Yamhill project and will not be compatible with AMD’s 64-bit extensions available now in AMD Opteron and Athlon 64 processors.
Intel’s top managers have been considering the enablement of the 64-bit extensions in Prescott and Tejas processors for some time now, but no final decisions have been made. What we know for sure is that Intel is not likely to turn on additional functionality of the Prescott processor until 2005, probably when AMD’s 64-bit processors become more or less wide-spread on the market and may affect Intel’s sales.
Intel has been saying that its 32-bit and 64-bit processors will co-exist totally independently in different market segments and has never confirmed plans to implement 64-bit extensions into its IA32 chips. Intel Itanium processors, on the other hand, can emulate conventional x86, but not really fast.
[/blockquote]
[link=http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/cpu/display/20031027151409.html]The full report[/link]
[blockquote]Apparently, the extensions may be a part of the well-known Yamhill project and will not be compatible with AMD’s 64-bit extensions available now in AMD Opteron and Athlon 64 processors.
Intel’s top managers have been considering the enablement of the 64-bit extensions in Prescott and Tejas processors for some time now, but no final decisions have been made. What we know for sure is that Intel is not likely to turn on additional functionality of the Prescott processor until 2005, probably when AMD’s 64-bit processors become more or less wide-spread on the market and may affect Intel’s sales.
Intel has been saying that its 32-bit and 64-bit processors will co-exist totally independently in different market segments and has never confirmed plans to implement 64-bit extensions into its IA32 chips. Intel Itanium processors, on the other hand, can emulate conventional x86, but not really fast.
[/blockquote]
[link=http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/cpu/display/20031027151409.html]The full report[/link]
0
Comments
As it stands now, Intel has absolutely no reason to release a 64-bit CPU as the market is just not there yet. Why would Intel pay the millions of dollars in advertising and networking to get the message out that 64-bit is the way to go when AMD is already (and has already) been doing just that.
Intel will hold off until they believe that there is a sufficient market to sell 64-bit CPU's. At that point... Intel will start selling 64-bit CPU's on all fronts: Servers, workstations, desktops and notebooks.
But until that market arrives... there's no reason to.
//Edit: Another thought.. Intel has invested over $1 Billion USD in R&D on the IA-64 Itanium project. Is it possible we will see 3 different versions of 64-bit processing? AMD's x86-64 and Intel's x86-64 derivative & their high-end IA-64 for pure 64-bit computing? What about retiring x86 all together and utilizing EPIC? Times look bright ahead for 64-bit computing, no matter what side you take.