Intel shuns 64 bit

Discussion in 'General Mac Discussion' started by funkywhat2, Feb 24, 2003.

  1. funkywhat2 macrumors 6502a


    Jul 14, 2002
    I hope nobody has posted this yet.

    Intel sees no need for 64 bit processors to go mainstream until 2008. Maybe this could be a selling point for Apple, assuming that they go 64 bit soon?
  2. Eniregnat macrumors 68000


    Jan 22, 2003
    In your head.
    The article really states that Intel doesn’t plan to produce 64bit mainstream chips for desktops until there is demand for them. The lack of applications seem to be the sticking point. I really don't buy that the physics of memory is what's holding them back. They are developing 64bit chips as well as 128 and up. It takes a long time for a chip design to hit the market, and only a foolish techno geek would believe that they are not constantly attempting to improve their states in the marketplace through development. If the market becomes viable, I would expect them to flood the market with products to fill the new needs.
  3. macphoria macrumors 6502a


    Nov 29, 2002
    We'll see. If AMD comes out with 64bit chip and MS starts churning out applications designed for 64bit, Intel might change its stance.

    Or could it be possible that MS is working with Intel on this so that MS will not release 64bit optimized applications and AMD's new 64bit chip will be useless AND Intel has time to go with its own plans?
  4. reflex macrumors 6502a

    May 19, 2002
    Intel may be right about waiting for apps to support/need it. Going from 32bit to 64bit seriously increases the memory usage of many applications and in most cases the extra size is not needed. Most applications can store just about anything in 32 bits. But the same will probably have been said about the move from 16bit to 32bit.
  5. cubist macrumors 68020

    Jul 4, 2002
    Muncie, Indiana
    Right, that was said.

    Intel is really saying this because their 64-bit processor, the Itanic, can't execute 32-bit code at any reasonable speed. It would be a total flop on the desktop, since desktop users have software they want to run. So they say, "We don't think that market is important".

    Obviously the OS can be 64-bit and can be of great benefit to applications, even if the apps are still 32-bit. Go look at Sun's Solaris if you doubt that. What Intel is saying is pure propaganda.
  6. jethroted macrumors 6502a


    Jan 2, 2003
    I hope they don't. That way apple can crush them! Stupid intel. When will the x86 world learn?
  7. Rustus Maximus macrumors 6502

    Rustus Maximus

    Jan 15, 2003
    Intel, the great Titanic of the computer world, is about to hit an iceberg. The gang at Apple, once again, has an opportunity to take control of the PC market and I think they will this time. They appear to have learned the lessons of their failure in the early days of the PC market so let's hope they don't forget again. Let Intel and Microsoft try to control/delay 64bit computing, it's coming whether they like it or not because of companies like Apple and AMD and others.

    Let them wait for the 'market to be viable'. Many times, the market won't move in a direction until it has the tech to do so...the old chicken or the egg argument, you know. So let em' wait...let em' wait all they want.

    (quietly contemplating 64bit processor, OS, and apps...ahhhhhh)
  8. timbloom macrumors 6502a


    Jan 19, 2002
    Seems like Intel is just saying under it's breath that IT isn't ready to make 64 bit chips. But this would be really bad for them, with the onslaught of 64 bit chips from other manufactures very soon.

    The first step to making them viable is making them in the first place. You can't just develop code for a chip that isn't there to be tested on.

    Geeks and powerusers will want the 64 bit chips no matter who they are made by, but by performance ratings. Microsoft would have to keep up to have it run their OS to keep that sliver of market share and attemt to keep it from going to linux or macs. Intel or not, we're going.

Share This Page