An interesting detail on the side: On September 8, 2003, Intel initiated a press event. During this event, they tried, among other things, to get the reporters present to above all employ benchmarks in comparative tests that know how to use the multi-threading capabilities of the P4. Apparently, Intel is worried about falling into oblivion as a result of the prevailing "Hammer" euphoria amongst the trade journals.

Share the same construction: Athlon 64 FX and Opteron

Therefore, AMD's advertising message, which is found in numerous media, is as follows: Buy a 64 bit processor today in order to be equipped for a later conversion to Windows XP 64. It doesn't sound too absurd if you consider that the 32 bit base (x86-32) will have to be replaced in the medium term. After all, at 32 bits, the physical address space is theoretically limited to 4 GB. And memory requirements are continuing to increase so that the barriers can only be broken by converting to 64 bit - apart from tricks such as registry extensions.

This argument alone has Intel in a position where it can't offer resistance with the P4 - even with the souped-up "P4 Extreme" version. In talks with editors, Intel's future planners like to hint that a desktop platform wouldn't benefit from 64 bits in the near future. Still, according to rumors, Intel has long since made provisions and integrated the 64 bit expansion "Yamhill" in the Prescott core planned for November 26. Even longstanding Intel employees in the 78,000 strong company, who have inside information, are not able to confirm or dispute the existence of a secret team of developers.

New for old: Left, the Athlon XP and the two Athlon 64s