The worlds No.1 chipmaker this week reportedly confirmed existence of its own 64-bit x86 microprocessor, but then denied the reality of any Intel's x86-64 CPU, when asked for clarification.

Intel keeps its secrets well and does not say anything in regards its strategy concerning 64-bit chips for mainstream PCs. Will it be a cost-effective Itanium? Or a high-end IA32 with extensions?

Source: http://www.xbitlabs.com/

Intel really isnt big with microprocessors.So it would be easy to see that the 64-bit x86 microprocessors.Intel only has microprocessors for notebook pcs, dell optiplex low end, or IBM servers.

I love microprocessors.As soon as I get a cam, ill get a picture of the Intel Celeron Microprocessor.

QuoteOriginally posted by youkaizero

Intel really isnt big with microprocessors.So it would be easy to see that the 64-bit x86 microprocessor isnt real..Intel only has microprocessors for notebook pcs, dell optiplex low end, or IBM servers.But on the cost effective question, I dont think so.They would have to get more tech and smarter people who know how to do it smaller.

I love microprocessors.As soon as I get a cam, ill get a picture of the Intel Celeron Microprocessor.

What exactly are you on about youkaizero?
Basically everything you're saying is wrong.

Intel IS big with microprocessors.
Intel DOES have a 64bit X86 processor; the Intel Pentium 4F which has the XD-bit and EMT64 (Intel's version of AMD64)

QuoteIntel only has microprocessors for notebook pcs, dell optiplex low end, or IBM servers

You don't know much about hardware do you?
Ever heard of the Intel Pentium and Intel Celeron?

Intel is the biggest microprocessor company around