If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
AMD won 64bit extension battle because they had a very strong product, at least as good as Intels and they were selling it at a very competitive price thus quickly gaining market share. There were simply too many amd cpus out there for intel to ignore that.
The reason AMD won the 64-bit extension war was that Microsoft backed it. MS and intel (at least back then) didn't exactly have a loving relationship. MS didn't like all the compromises that intel was insisting being put into windows and intel certainly didn't like the fact that MS at the time were going to be using a AMD chip in the first gen XBoX. Going AMD64 instead of IA64 didn't require a compromise be made with regards to their existing line where as IA64 required some major changes and legacy apps would have to run under emulation.
The reason AMD won the 64-bit extension war was that Microsoft backed it.
Which in turn was a technical decision.
Anyway, I was thinking of going with AMD's Bulldozer next time I ugrade but given what I've seen sofar it's been quite underwhelming. Still, I reckon I have atleast 1-2 years before I feel I've outgrown my core i7 and i5 and it will be interesting to see what the Bulldozer architecture offers at that time compared to Intel.
Are you dreaming? Xbox 1 had a 733 MHz INTEL chip!
No I am not dreaming Kano. XBoX 1 was originally supposed to have an AMD cpu (and early prototypes did) and what later became the nForce chipset. However intel came along and did their classic FUD campain at the time and convinced MS that the AMD cpu wouldn't be up to the task (thermal wise).