Intel Quietly Adopts AMD's x86-64

HishamMuhammad writes "The rumors reported earlier at /. are confirmed. The latest offerings in the Pentium 4 family now support AMD's x86-64 architecture, even though Intel is not willing to admit it very openly, by using cryptic names like EM64T and (gasp) IA-32e. (The naming issue was discussed on lkml, and the consensus there was to use 'x86-64,' even though sometimes AMD refers to it as 'AMD64'). Intel's FAQ admits their implementation is basically compatible with x86-64, except for the minor differences that have always set Athlons and P4s apart. It's about time Intel jumped on AMD's bandwagon, since its homegrown 64-bit architecture seems not to be doing very well."

Comments

A bit sad, really

[nobodyman]

Now, I'm not up on IA-64, so I can't comment on whether it's a good design or not. However, I think it's unfortunate for intel that they are in a situation where they are continually blasted by IT community.

The primary complaint with the iterations IA-32 is that the chip was overly complex (from a design and programming perspective) because Intel chose to maintain backwards compatibility. However, when they decided to start completely from scratch and create a completely new architecture with IA-64, they were roundly criticized for (wait for it) not maintaining backwards compatibility.

Now they are being written off as an also-ran that is now trying to "catch up" with AMD, which is a bit laughable when you consider that they only did what AMD has been doing for years (namely, copying a competitors design).

I think it's great that there's competition in the market, and that the consumer has largely benefitted from having two x86 vendors. But make no mistake: AMD is not the "good guy". They are not innovators by any stretch of the imagination. Many of their employees suffer deplorable work conditions. They offer a similar product at cheaper prices. End of story.