Tualatin is a dynamite server chip. One of the reasons (Intel) decided not to go forward with the Foster-based Xeon chip was because Tualatin, with its larger cache, had better performance in server environments.
Tualatin is a dynamite server chip, ... One of the reasons (Intel) decided not to go forward with the Foster-based Xeon chip was because Tualatin, with its larger cache, had better performance in server environments.
Intel wants to get them out in a hurry. I would assume they have a longer-term plan, probably around 45-nanometer technology, to provide a more comprehensively designed quad-core.
Intel seems to have kicked the megahertz habit. It's probably music to Steve Jobs' ears.
Intel is trailing both in terms of basic performance and performance per watt. I think by the end of the year, they can be at near parity with AMD.
Intel has never really had to deal with a competitor in the x86 space that had its act together. But how much of the problem is due to AMD's competitiveness, and how much is due to internal factors like chipsets and inventories?
Intel gets some bragging right here: we do something ahead of AMD for a change.
That, of course, is the 64-bit question. Whether the AMD box can perform like IA-64 on Itanium. If the AMD box can do it, we'd be looking from a purely architectural point of view at a superior solution, because Intel is forcing people to make a compromise.
That, of course, is the 64-bit question, ... Whether the AMD box can perform like IA-64 on Itanium. If the AMD box can do it, we'd be looking from a purely architectural point of view at a superior solution, because Intel is forcing people to make a compromise.
They clearly are at the tail end of what has been a pretty painful period for Intel. They had to tear up their road map and scramble to find new products to drop into the places where the old products were going to appear.
