Intel will on Tuesday offer a further glimpse into the future of its Itanium processor family, shining the spotlight on a new model code-named Poulson, CNET News.com has learned.
Pat Gelsinger, Intel's former chief technology officer and now one of two chiefs of the company's Digital Enterprise Group, is expected to discuss Poulson briefly at Intel's Developer Forum in San Francisco, sources familiar with the situation said.
Poulson is scheduled to succeed Tukwila, an Itanium processor due in 2007 that had previously been code-named Tanglewood. Intel declined to comment for this story.
News.context
What's new: At its Developer Forum, Intel will offer a further glimpse into the future of its Itanium processor family, shining the spotlight on a new model code-named Poulson.
Bottom line: Though Intel isn't expected to offer many details, revealing the code name sends a significant message: Intel still has long-term plans for Itanium, despite the chip's troubles and the relative popularity of the company's lower-end Xeon products.
Though Intel isn't expected to offer many details, revealing the code name sends a significant message: Intel still has long-term plans for Itanium, despite the chip's troubles and the relative popularity of the company's lower-end Xeon products.
Intel has had difficulty getting Itanium to fulfill initial expectations by becoming as widespread in the server market as the Pentium is today among desktop computers. One of the major sticking points has been that software written for x86 chips such as Pentium runs only slowly and awkwardly on Itanium.
But for all the difficulties, Intel isn't throwing in the towel.
One major change will come with the Tukwila generation of chips. At that point, for the first time, Xeon and Itanium chips will have the same electronic interface, making it easier to design servers that support either processor. And Intel promises that in 2007, Itanium and Xeon systems will cost the same, but Itaniums will have twice the performance.
And several second-tier server makers still have their own Itanium
I won't say that Itanium is the best, but at some point I believe the x86 technology is going to become outdated nomatter what you do to it. I think at some point we are going to have to have a replacement. Maybe then (2070) Itanium will have a chance :).
I won't say that Itanium is the best, but at some point I believe the x86 technology is going to become outdated nomatter what you do to it. I think at some point we are going to have to have a replacement. Maybe then (2070) Itanium will have a chance :).
Intels approach to Itanium is the same approach they took with the Pentium4 and their associated chipsets, either use slow SDRAM or use RAMBUS RDRAM because that's all we're supporting. Well that changed when nobody wanted RDRAM but they lost countless millions in the process. Another instance is when AMD came out with the X86 64 bit extensions, Intels take was we are not going to do that because we we have the Itanium. Now they have implemented the 64 bit extensions into their chips but only after losing sales to AMD. Itanium is not a bad processor but it is just not x86 compatible. When Intel finally integrates x86 microcode and compatibility (or at least very efficient virtual compatibility) Itanium will just be the Itanic. When will Intel open their eyes and ears to the consuming public and develop for their consumers and not their research geeks? My bet is not soon.
Intels approach to Itanium is the same approach they took with the Pentium4 and their associated chipsets, either use slow SDRAM or use RAMBUS RDRAM because that's all we're supporting. Well that changed when nobody wanted RDRAM but they lost countless millions in the process. Another instance is when AMD came out with the X86 64 bit extensions, Intels take was we are not going to do that because we we have the Itanium. Now they have implemented the 64 bit extensions into their chips but only after losing sales to AMD. Itanium is not a bad processor but it is just not x86 compatible. When Intel finally integrates x86 microcode and compatibility (or at least very efficient virtual compatibility) Itanium will just be the Itanic. When will Intel open their eyes and ears to the consuming public and develop for their consumers and not their research geeks? My bet is not soon.
Web giant is spending $120 million to beef up its Mountain View, Calif., headquarters, according to filings with the city reviewed by the San Jose Mercury News.
The Samsung Galaxy Mini 2 S6500 could make its debut at the Mobile World Congress in Barcelona later this month, according to a leaked promotional image.
MIT creates a simulation to celebrate the 50th anniversary of Spacewar. A relic of the early days of minicomputers, it was one of the first computer video games and set the stage for many others, including Asteroids.
Though Intel isn't expected to offer many details, revealing the code name sends a significant message: Intel still has long-term plans for Itanium, despite the chip's troubles and the relative popularity of the company's lower-end Xeon products.
Another instance is when AMD came out with the X86 64 bit extensions, Intels take was we are not going to do that because we we have the Itanium. Now they have implemented the 64 bit extensions into their chips but only after losing sales to AMD.
Itanium is not a bad processor but it is just not x86 compatible. When Intel finally integrates x86 microcode and compatibility (or at least very efficient virtual compatibility) Itanium will just be the Itanic.
When will Intel open their eyes and ears to the consuming public and develop for their consumers and not their research geeks? My bet is not soon.
Fred Dunn
Another instance is when AMD came out with the X86 64 bit extensions, Intels take was we are not going to do that because we we have the Itanium. Now they have implemented the 64 bit extensions into their chips but only after losing sales to AMD.
Itanium is not a bad processor but it is just not x86 compatible. When Intel finally integrates x86 microcode and compatibility (or at least very efficient virtual compatibility) Itanium will just be the Itanic.
When will Intel open their eyes and ears to the consuming public and develop for their consumers and not their research geeks? My bet is not soon.
Fred Dunn