This is getting totally offtopic.
Quote Originally Posted by Shintai View Post
Oh really? Can you tell me why AMD reduced its R&D with 500million and Intel have reduced it with 300million, and might reduce it further?

Dont mix factory cost with R&D.
AMD intends to cut 500mil by slowing down the upgrade of FAB30 -> FAB38 not cuttint R&D Dunno about Intel


There is no reason a computer cant last 5years or more. Today it usually last 2-3 years due to people wanting the newer and faster.
It is possible to skew the perception ofthe public you know. In fact Intel were and still are experts at it.

So you admit that competition is the issue. You dont develop it overnight. IA64 performance in itself is good. Compability performance sucked. AMD did as I described. Added a cheap touch and we sit in the same garbage for the next 20 years. If over 10 billion$ cant change architecture in a competitive environment. Then what is needed?
NO i dont admit anything like that. Dont put words in my mouth. Any new technology has to offer significant improvements in order to overcome the early adoption barrier all new technologies have to face. If it does not deliver it does not get adopted. IA64 never delivered on Intels promises and expectations. AMD on the other hand made significant improvements to the x86 arch. The IMC, HT, C'N'Q, AMD64 and soon split power planes, independent core throttling, on the fly gpu switching(for mobile platforms), CTM, heterogenous computing, high IPC focus,native dualcore/quadcore etc. Basically AMD made the dying x86 competitive again. BTW same crap? Where does that leave C2D...


It actually worked fine for transmeta. Dont tell me nobody will enter the market. If the profit is good enough there to be made, then you will get competition. Its no more different on how Via, Cyrix, Transmeta and Nexgen started.

The only barrier there is, is the direct foundry advantage a company can have.
Notice a trend related to all those companies you mentioned? They are all out of business(in cpu manufacturing) or occupy a fringe segment of the market! It is very difficult to compete with a huge company like Intel. You need to spend huge amounts of money in R&D just to get started, then spend quite a lot of money on manufacturing, all that in a highly competitive market. No investor who has a bit of common sense would spend money on a x86 startup.

Now to get on topic. Barcelona is a server part. A market where absolute performance means very little. Improved powersaving and low TDP are going to matter a lot for datacenters and multisocket sytems. That is Barcelonas target market. If it can deliver on the IPC front it is a winner at least until Intel releases 45nm server cpus in Q4/Q1 08. Desktop parts are going to get clocked higher than 2.0ghz and there is no telling right now how good or bad a 2.6ghz k10 compares to Kentsfield.