Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Intel Quietly Adopts AMD's x86-64

Posted by timothy on from the or-an-incredible-simulation dept.

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."

2 of 392 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Just as a side note by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Flamebait


    And you got this from where?

    The renaming discussion ended in June, before this press release, and much of the discussion found the concept that Intel would do this... amusing.

    Go back to sucking Linus' cock on the LKML.

  2. A bit sad, really by nobodyman · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    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.