Transmeta leaving the x86 processor business?

Talk about "WhatEVER !"..
Post Reply
Message
Author
K. Eng
Moderator Emeritus
Moderator Emeritus
Posts: 1946
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2004 7:10 am
Location: Pennsylvania, United States

Transmeta leaving the x86 processor business?

#1 Post by K. Eng » Fri Apr 01, 2005 5:54 pm

http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=22266

I'm sort of disappointed. I remember reading about TMTA back in late 1999 and thinking that their Crusoe chip would be great for notebooks. And then I remember reading the benchmarks in 2000 and being underwhelmed. The battery life of Crusoe (and later Efficeon) CPUs was mediocre at best and the battery life was marginally better than Pentium III notebooks, and about the same as Centrino notebooks.

Hopefully TMTA will continue to contribute to low power technologies.
Homebuilt PC: AMD Athlon XP (Barton) @ 1.47 GHz; nForce2 Ultra; 1GB RAM; 80GB HDD @ 7200RPM; ATI Radeon 9600; Integrated everything else!

anthean
Sophomore Member
Posts: 131
Joined: Tue Feb 22, 2005 10:38 pm
Location: Sioux Falls, SD

Transmeta

#2 Post by anthean » Fri Apr 01, 2005 9:40 pm

I agree, I had hoped Transmeta would see at least surviveable success. Competition is good for us consumers.

In fact, Intel may owe quite a bit (although perhaps not its survival) to Transmeta. While some suggest that Intel just naturally realized that the P4 was not a good mobile chip (if this occurred around 2000 it was a rather late realization), I believe in fact the threat posed by the low power Transmeta Crusoe pushed Intel to develop the Pentium M.

With the P4 now hitting a brick wall with respect to speed, and with Itanium receiving less than fantastic acceptance, the Pentium M is Intel's single current success.

Intel's longer range plans may also depend on a further development of the Pentium M (Merom with versions for both mobile and desktop).
T41 and T410

"Come on in and buy the new squat screen. Squatter is better !"

Batuta
Junior Member
Junior Member
Posts: 399
Joined: Fri Feb 18, 2005 12:55 pm

#3 Post by Batuta » Wed Apr 13, 2005 9:24 am

...
Last edited by Batuta on Thu May 12, 2005 10:36 am, edited 1 time in total.
Die Hard OS/2

K. Eng
Moderator Emeritus
Moderator Emeritus
Posts: 1946
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2004 7:10 am
Location: Pennsylvania, United States

#4 Post by K. Eng » Thu Apr 14, 2005 4:48 pm

Flexibility and simpler hardware. I remember reading that moving a lot of the x86 compatibility into software reduced the number of transistors needed in the actual execution core (fewer transistors supposedly meant less power consumption). Of course the software overhead essentially negated any performance advantages the hardware might have had.
Batuta wrote:I'm neither disappointed nor surprised.
Their original claim was flexibillity. They said they could emulate every chip out there. But since we (almost) all live in an Intel world anyway, what's the use of such an emulator?
It would have been much better if they'd just decided to compete in the x86 world and gone the way AMD did.
Try to invent another Pentium, better than the Pentium.
Not to original, not very fancy, but still a money maker.
Homebuilt PC: AMD Athlon XP (Barton) @ 1.47 GHz; nForce2 Ultra; 1GB RAM; 80GB HDD @ 7200RPM; ATI Radeon 9600; Integrated everything else!

Batuta
Junior Member
Junior Member
Posts: 399
Joined: Fri Feb 18, 2005 12:55 pm

#5 Post by Batuta » Mon Apr 18, 2005 9:36 am

...
Die Hard OS/2

Post Reply
  • Similar Topics
    Replies
    Views
    Last post

Return to “Off-Topic Stuff”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests