Humi meldt dat Anand een korte editorial heeft geschreven over AMD's x86-64 en Intel's IA-64 architectuur. In deze editorial wordt kort uitgelegt wat de verschillen tussen beide architecturen zijn en wat de voor- en nadelen zijn. Het grote nadeel van IA-64 is duidelijk het ontbreken van een echte 32-bit mode en het probleem van AMD zou volgens Anand misschien wel de chipset kunnen worden, ze zien Via nog geen high-end chipsets maken, dus zal AMD het alleen moeten doen:
The first x86-64 based processors from AMD will be available sometime next year, this is contrary to rumors that we've seen pop up but realistically speaking, you're not going to see a SledgeHammer (K8) in 2000.
Like the current Athlon core, there will eventually be many variations on the K8 core. Most likely variations based on cache size, core clock frequency and maybe even FSB frequency will allow the x86-64 architecture to slowly but eventually filter down to non-enterprise applications.
The only issue we see at this point in time is chipset support for the K8. As of now, VIA is the biggest chipset provider for AMD's processors, but we can guarantee you that VIA, a company that is based around producing value chipsets, isn't going to be making enterprise level K8 chipsets. AMD's two other supporters in the chipset industry, ALi and SiS aren't even as big as VIA in the desktop chipset market right now, there's no way either of them will be supplying K8 chipsets, this leaves AMD to handle the task alone.
Developing and producing a chipset for such a high-end processor is not easy, it will definitely be much more difficult to implement than AMD's 750 was, and even then, the 750 was much more difficult than the BX chipsets motherboard manufacturers were used to playing with.
It should be interesting to see how the entire picture unfolds as there is much more to a successful processor than a solid architecture, although having the latter is definitely one step in the right direction.