Deutsch English Français Italiano |
<20240915112216.00003a34@yahoo.com> View for Bookmarking (what is this?) Look up another Usenet article |
Path: ...!2.eu.feeder.erje.net!feeder.erje.net!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> Newsgroups: comp.arch Subject: Re: Is Intel exceptionally unsuccessful as an architecture designer? Date: Sun, 15 Sep 2024 11:22:16 +0300 Organization: A noiseless patient Spider Lines: 33 Message-ID: <20240915112216.00003a34@yahoo.com> References: <memo.20240913205156.19028s@jgd.cix.co.uk> <2024Sep14.092902@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at> <20240915000639.00003b00@yahoo.com> <a95a0222aea5d80cb1a9c9954e42c72d@www.novabbs.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Injection-Date: Sun, 15 Sep 2024 10:21:52 +0200 (CEST) Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="b1d11931d9aad568cedfe64b3767d71c"; logging-data="2177741"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1914ADB8HUL29s+USpJyU1T3EpfW+Yr8xA=" Cancel-Lock: sha1:2+UmBFTrsVSdJJ444ThTOBpjB/c= X-Newsreader: Claws Mail 3.19.1 (GTK+ 2.24.33; x86_64-w64-mingw32) Bytes: 2433 On Sat, 14 Sep 2024 22:49:21 +0000 mitchalsup@aol.com (MitchAlsup1) wrote: > On Sat, 14 Sep 2024 21:06:39 +0000, Michael S wrote: >=20 > > On Sat, 14 Sep 2024 07:29:02 GMT > > anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) wrote: > > =20 > >> > >> It seems to me that IA-64 was a bigger failure: More money > >> invested, and more money lost (probably even relative to the size > >> of the company at the time). > >> > >> - anton =20 > > > > But more money made, too. > > I'd suppose, in its later days, when all ambitions evaporated, > > Itanium became a decent cache cow for Intel. Not spectacular, of > > course, just decent. =20 >=20 > I do not believe that the sales revenue even met the engineering and > manufacturing costs. >=20 ASP was certainly many time higher than manufacturing cost, esp. after migration to 90nm in 2006. Engineering cost was huge up until 2010, but significant part of what was spent in 2005-2010 (development of QPI) was reused by Xeons. In 2010-2012 engineering cost was probably quite moderate.=20 =46rom 2013 to EOL in 2022 engineering cost was very low. So, even if Itanium enterprise as whole lost a lot of money its last 12-13 years taken in isolation were likely quite profitable.