Sujet : Re: Intel
De : pcdhSpamMeSenseless (at) *nospam* electrooptical.net (Phil Hobbs)
Groupes : sci.electronics.designDate : 03. Aug 2024, 22:52:46
Autres entêtes
Message-ID : <b04fa5c6-7cb5-4aa5-437d-08d37a35e759@electrooptical.net>
References : 1 2 3
User-Agent : Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.0
On 2024-08-03 17:47, John Larkin wrote:
On Sat, 03 Aug 2024 17:18:33 -0400, Joe Gwinn <joegwinn@comcast.net>
wrote:
On Sat, 03 Aug 2024 12:32:23 -0700, John Larkin
<jjlarkin@highlandtechnology.com> wrote:
>
https://www.nextplatform.com/2024/08/02/the-resurrection-of-intel-will-take-more-than-three-days/?td=rt-3a
>
Looks like they wrecked Altera.
>
And hung onto the Intel '86 architecture a tad too tightly, for far
too long.
>
Joe Gwinn
Yes, it's an ancient dog. It's immensely complex to push the X86
architecture for speed, hence the power consumption and all the bugs.
AMD has been doing it pretty well, for awhile. The X86_64 architecture was theirs, for instance--Intel was still pushing Itanium, alias Itanic.
Cheers
Phil Hobbs
-- Dr Philip C D HobbsPrincipal ConsultantElectroOptical Innovations LLC / Hobbs ElectroOpticsOptics, Electro-optics, Photonics, Analog ElectronicsBriarcliff Manor NY 10510
http://electrooptical.nethttp://hobbs-eo.com
Intel
Re: Intel