64Bit Technology

Intel to Bridge its 64-bit Gap with x86

Intel said it is considering updating its 32-bit x86 processor line to 64-bit, but when that will happen is anybody's guess.

In a Webcast for financial analysts, company president and COO Paul Otellini said the company continues to be open to the idea, but maintained that there is no mainstream 64-bit application available that is pushing Intel's 64-bit agenda beyond its Itanium processor family.

"You can be fairly confident that, when there is software from an application and operating system standpoint that will take advantage of it, that we will be there," Otellini said during the webcast.

Intel spokesperson Scott McLaughlin told internetnews.com Otellini's comments were in no way indicative that the company has something in the pipeline, despite what pundits might be saying.

"We have said that we would look at the extensions if the ecosystem is there and by ecosystem we mean software and operating systems will support it and if customers are requesting it," McLaughlin said.

Currently, Santa Clara, Calif.-based Intel maintains a healthy 32-bit processor lineup with its Pentium desktop processors and its workhorse Xeon server chips. So the need for Intel to ratchet up Pentium or Xeon to 64-bit status seems to be a dilemma for Intel.

During the company's last bi-annual Developer's Forum, Intel CTO Pat Gelsinger suggested that the need to move to 64-bit was not even necessary until at least until 2006 or 2007. Any move prior to that might be considered premature at best, Gelsinger said at the time, considering the 32-bit addressing limit of 4GB seemed to be doing fine in the marketplace.

And while the shift to 64-bit processors is not impossible for Intel, there is the question of whether or not the company would extend the technology and put it in direct competition with Itanium.

"Once you can get the 64-bit technology in a Pentium, the higher priced Itanium seems outdated," Industry analyst Rob Enderle told internetnews.com in a recent interview.

Sales of EPIC-architecture Itanium have been sputtering along. In November, Otellini said the company is on track to ship 100,000 units by the end of 2004 and about 300,000 by the end of 2005.

He acknowledged that the cost of memory to support 64-bit systems could price a desktop PC somewhere between $2,000 and $3,000, but said eventually there would be price drops.

"Just like we went from 16- to 32-bits, the memory requirements grow over time on applications, just as memory costs come down over time," Otellini said. "So at some point it becomes very economical."

Adding to Intel's headaches is the growing popularity of x86-64 processors being produced by rival AMD. The Sunnyvale, Calif.-based semiconductor maker is reporting a growing number of sales for its Opteron and Athlon 64 products.

Previously code-named "Hammer," the server and desktop processors can run 64-bit applications natively but are also backwards compatible with 32-bit programs.

To counter, Intel has been working on its Yamhill technology. The set of 64-bit extensions to the 32-bit x86 instruction set is not expected to debut in Pentiums until 2005. However, American Technology Research analyst Rick Whittington said Intel's x86 at 32-bit is showing its age in both desktop and server applications.

"If they choose to stay with Itanium as their only 64-bit solution, AMD could capture significant share," Whittington said in a recent e-mail to subscribers. "If Intel announces its own x86-64 processor, any traction Itanium has will be slowed to a crawl and force Intel to play catch up. Perhaps Intel lets enough leak out about its own x86-64 extensions for Prescott or Tejas that if forces customers to wait and AMD's momentum slows.

In the mean time, Whittington said customers should expect to be treated to price cuts on Intel's aging x86-32 line while AMD responds to compete.

Intel shifts 64-bit emphasis : January 29, 2004,

Intel plans to demonstrate a 64-bit revamp of its Xeon and Pentium processors in mid-February--an endorsement of a major rival's strategy and a troubling development for Intel's Itanium chip.

The demo, which follows the AMD64 approach of Intel foe Advanced Micro Devices, is expected at the Intel developer conference, Feb. 17 through 19 in San Francisco, according to sources familiar with the plan. Intel had code-named the technology Yamhill but now calls it CT, sources said.

Adding 64-bit features would let "x86" chips such as Intel's Xeon and Pentium overcome today's 4GB memory limit but would undermine the hope that Intel's current 64-bit chip, Itanium, will ever ship in large quantities. A CT demonstration would send the message that prospective Itanium customers should put Itanium purchases on hold, said Peter Glaskowsky, editor in chief of In-Stat/MDR's Microprocessor Report.

"If they put all the effort into Xeon they put into Itanium, it could be a very impressive thing. They could get very close to the performance levels of Itanium," Glaskowsky said. But there would be a cost: "In the long run, if they were really serious about x86-64...it would kill Itanium."

That would hurt Intel, which has staked much of its reputation on Itanium, but it would affect partners such as Hewlett-Packard and Silicon Graphics moreso; both rely on Itanium for their future server designs.

Bill Kircos, an Intel spokesman, declined to comment on the CT name or plan other than to say, "We will include extensions in our chips, if our customers are requesting it and if the infrastructure is available, including a production operating system...tools, software and applications."

Kircos also maintained that Itanium "has turned a corner" and is achieving mainstream acceptance in the high-end server market. "The (chief information officers) who buy Itanium are more conservative than Pat Buchanan"--unwilling to make dramatic computing changes overnight. "This is a marathon; not a sprint."

The CT name follows a pattern Intel uses to name features the Santa Clara, Calif.-based chipmaker is building into its chips: The already released HT, or hyperthreading, technology lets a single chip act in some ways like two; the VT, or "Vanderpool," technology runs multiple operating systems on one chip; and the LT, "LaGrande," security technology.

AMD's Opteron is catching on. In the third quarter--only the second since Opteron's April debut--about 10,746 Opteron servers were sold--more than twice the 4,957 Itanium systems, according to market researcher IDC. However, Opteron and Itanium shipments are both far short of selling the 1.18 million servers shipped with Intel's Xeon or Pentium or AMD's Athlon.

Major names have joined several second-tier companies to sell Opteron servers, including IBM, Sun Microsystems and, according to sources, soon Hewlett-Packard, too.

Itanium was once expected to spread as widely as Pentium, but Itanium forecasts have been declining in recent years. In 2000, IDC projected Itanium server sales of $28 billion by 2004. Two weeks ago, IDC lowered its 2007 forecast to $7.5 billion.

The high stakes for Intel have meant close scrutiny of the words of Intel executives. Two weeks ago, Mike Fister, the head of Intel's server group, predicted that lower Itanium prices "could kind of obfuscate" Xeon. But on Wednesday, Intel Chief Operating Officer Paul Otellini boosted the x86-64 direction, saying in a Webcast interview with Schwab Soundview Capital Markets on Wednesday, "You can be fairly confident that when there is software from an application and operating system standpoint, we'll be there."

Itanium has been able to run x86 software only very slowly, but Intel says performance is improving, with a software emulation technology called IA-32 Execution Layer. In contrast, AMD's x86-64 approach, now called AMD64, runs the vast quantity of existing software for Pentium and Xeon.

An Intel CT demonstration doesn't mean that the technology is ready for mainstream use, however.

Analysts believe that as with hyperthreading, Vanderpool and LaGrande, Intel put the technology into chips but is waiting to enable it, until necessary software support catches up. Both Nathan Brookwood, an analyst at Insight64, and Glaskowsky believe that CT was built into an upcoming Pentium 4 version called Prescott, due Feb. 2.

That means that CT would also be in Prescott's Xeon derivatives--"Nocona" for dual-processor systems and "Potomac" for those with four or more processors.

However, Brookwood believes that Intel will wait for the appearance of Prescott's successor, called Tejas, which is due in early 2005. The reason for the wait, Brookwood believes, is that the Prescott designs were complete before Intel had access to AMD's approach, meaning that software tuned for one wouldn't work on the other.

"They need that compatibility now," Brookwood said. "I believe that Tejas is coming so hard on Prescott's heels, (because) Tejas has the compatibility that is not in Prescott and Prescott derivatives."

IBM, for one, believes that x86 has a strong future, with plans for a 64-processor server.

Because of the Itanium commitment, Intel is currently reluctant to talk about how great CT could make Xeon, Glaskowsky said. "They cannot afford to say that, because they're not sure yet that they want to do this," he said.

Intel shifts 64-bit emphasis : January 29, 2004,

Copyright © 2003 PC ADRENALIN Last modified: 07/17/04

Copyright © 2003 PC ADRENALIN
Last modified: 07/17/04