Re: Minutes from Feb 21 LSE Call

["Martin J. Bligh" <mbligh@aracnet.com>]

>   >>  But does x86 reall work so well?  Itanium 2 on 0.13um performs a
>   >> lot better than P4 on 0.13um.  As far as I can guess, the only
>   >> reason P4 comes out on 0.13um (and 0.09um) before anything else
>   >> is due to the latter part you mention: it's where the volume is
>   >> today.
> 
>   Martin> Care to share those impressive benchmark numbers (for
>   Martin> macro-benchmarks)?  Would be interesting to see the
>   Martin> difference, and where it wins.
> 
> You can do it two ways: you can look at the numbers Intel is publicly
> projected for Madison, or you can compare McKinley with 0.18um Pentium 4.

Ummm ... I'm not exactly happy working with Intel's own projections on the
performance of their Itanium chips ... seems a little unscientific ;-)

Presumably when you said "Itanium 2 on 0.13um performs a lot better than P4
on 0.13um." you were referring to some benchmarks you have the results of? 

If you can't publish them, fair enough. But if you can, I'd love to see how
it compares ... Itanium seems to be "more interesting" nowadays, though I
can't say I'm happy about the complexity of it.

M.