5 ms·
I wonder how would people feel about itanium failure had it been developed by anyone other than Intel; I mean, would there be that lingering feeling it could ha
by ithkuil 6y ago
I wonder how would people feel about itanium failure had it been developed by anyone other than Intel; I mean, would there be that lingering feeling it could have been something had only the right amount of resources put into it etc etc?
- freeone3000 6y agoMaybe? The architecture is weird -- it required user programs to be aware of and utilize superscalar pipelining. Superscalar pipelining was a great bet, the assumption that programmers and application writers could explicitly take advantage of it was not. It's a really COOL architecture, but I'm not sure it could ever have been a commercially successful one.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- moonbug 6y agono. in order VLIW dependent on handwaving compiler magic never works.
- mhh__ 6y agoI still think there is a medium between the two that could work - if you look at uops per port measurements there's still a lot of room left for improvements i.e. the mantra is "The compiler will never know more than the chip" but sometimes the CPU is pretty dumb too
- CalChris 6y agoItanium was actually developed by HP starting in 1989 and then Intel joined in 1994.
- fred_is_fred 6y agoNot only that but in the early 2000s HP effectively gave Intel all their hardware design team to help with the effort.
- unilynx 6y agoFor comparison, how do you feel about Transmeta?
- netflixandkill 6y agoProbably not, it felt a lot like an experiment that was picked to win and then still didn't. Almost like a reverse i960, which ended up being really good at a few niche applications that certain problem spaces kept it in at least some demand long after it was effectively abandoned.