The Itanium was a new 64bit architecture. AMD64 is just addition to the 32bit Intel architecture. Itanium didn't make it, so we're stuck with backward compatibility all the way to 8080 in today's x86 processors. That's all in the past! What I'm looking forward is to the future SoC releases with Intel cores and Nvidia graphics.

▲

chasil 3 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Actually, AArch64 appears to be preferred by many.

Apple has discarded all 32-bit legacy, implementing only 64-bit in their equipment to great success.

Fujitsu did the same with their supercomputer that was the best-performing in the world for a time.

Had Intel bought ARM, then espoused their architecture in the age of the Athlon, perhaps things would have been very different.

	▲	hawflakes 11 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		Funny enough when Intel and DEC settled their lawsuit Intel got StrongARM[1] from DEC which was pretty fast for its time. It was a pretty cool, literally, chip that didn't need a heatsink. I had a Shark set-top appliance prototype. The offical name was DNARD — Digital Network Appliance Reference Design. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/StrongARM [2] https://collection.maynardhistory.org/items/show/8946

▲

fluoridation 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

>What I'm looking forward is to the future SoC releases with Intel cores and Nvidia graphics.

As far as I know those are still going to be x86s, only with Nvidia dies tacked on.