Dell "confirmed" for AMD desktops...

[Viditor]

International Business Times article

"In line with recent investor speculation," Pacific Crest's Michael McConnell said, "we have confirmed that Dell plans to broaden its supplier relationship with AMD in the second half of 2006."

He says Dell is already preparing desktop computers based around AMD's Athlon-64 processor, which are targeted towards the consumer markets. These systems are expected to ship in the third fiscal quarter, which ends October.

Notebook computers are also in development and will be based around AMD's Turion-64 mobile processors. They are expected to ship in the first quarter of 2007, he said. Official details should be announced at the Dell's August 17th earnings conference call, or during its analysts day in September, McConnell said.

The worlds largest computer manufacturer has targeted an initial ramp of 1.2 million AMD-based desktop and server units for its third quarter. This, McConnell elaborates, represents 16 to 17 percent of the company's projected desktop and server units in aggregate.

On top of this, Santa Clara based Nvidia Corp. has captured "the platform design win" with its nForce chipset for the new AMD models. Platforms designs serve as the foundation of the computer, connecting the CPU, memory, and other parts together

 

[harpoon84]

Good news for AMD. They certainly need it after the Conroe hammering.

Anyone know how much this will boost their marketshare?

 

[Viditor]

Originally posted by: harpoon84
Good news for AMD. They certainly need it after the Conroe hammering.

Anyone know how much this will boost their marketshare?

Well, for perspective...Intel is planning on shipping a total of 1 million Conroes in 7 weeks (this is their goal).
Article
That's a little over half a quarter...
If Dell alone is planning on ramping a little more than that in AMD for Q3, then things aren't quite as bleak for AMD as many are assuming...

 

[Henny]

Originally posted by: harpoon84
Good news for AMD. They certainly need it after the Conroe hammering.

Anyone know how much this will boost their marketshare?

Good news?? I bet they had to give away the store to get this deal signed.

Dell seems to only care about the low end these days.

That's hardly a win for AMD or Dell. If AMD could sell anywhere else they'd probably have done better.

 

[myocardia]

Originally posted by: Henny
[If AMD could sell anywhere else they'd probably have done better.

AMD already sells to every other manufacturer. Dell, however, is the largest, and so will move more processors. BTW, selling 3 times as many chips, for half the profit, doesn't sound at all bad to me.

 

[harpoon84]

Originally posted by: myocardia

Originally posted by: Henny
[If AMD could sell anywhere else they'd probably have done better.

AMD already sells to every other manufacturer. Dell, however, is the largest, and so will move more processors. BTW, selling 3 times as many chips, for half the profit, doesn't sound at all bad to me.

Agreed. Selling in bulk with lower margins is a good move. 1.2 million chips ain't to be sniffed at. On a world scale it probably it probably isn't such a big deal, but for AMD it's quite a significant deal.

 

[gobucks]

this is definitely a big deal for AMD, and i wonder if it has anything to do with Dell's existing use of mostly ATi video cards, since now maybe they could get even better prices by agreeing to use both AMD's CPUs and GPUs.

the only thing i can't figure out is why Dell, after offering exclusively Intel, even when AMD had a commanding lead for the last 3 years, now decided to pick up AMD after Intel finally came up with an amazingly fast and cool-running product. the only thing that makes sense is that dell knows AMD is gonna be slashing its prices like mad, and maybe they figure they can get ridiculously cheap processors from AMD in exchange for offering them a large chunk of the market.

 

[Zap]

I've read that Intel's super sweet deals to "Intel Only" shops ended.

 

[Xcobra]

definately good for AMD compared to if this deal wouldnt have happened so its good either way...

 

[Kwint Sommer]

Originally posted by: gobucks
this is definitely a big deal for AMD, and i wonder if it has anything to do with Dell's existing use of mostly ATi video cards, since now maybe they could get even better prices by agreeing to use both AMD's CPUs and GPUs.

the only thing i can't figure out is why Dell, after offering exclusively Intel, even when AMD had a commanding lead for the last 3 years, now decided to pick up AMD after Intel finally came up with an amazingly fast and cool-running product. the only thing that makes sense is that dell knows AMD is gonna be slashing its prices like mad, and maybe they figure they can get ridiculously cheap processors from AMD in exchange for offering them a large chunk of the market.

My guess is that AMD gave the classic ?deal they couldn?t refuse? which was a combination of threats to raise prices on ATI cards and very ?competitive? offers on AMD CPUs.
AMD has extensive fabrication facilities that it either needs to use or shutdown. If Intel takes a big portion of AMD?s market share (which it could between cheap Prescotts and the Conroes) then they will have more chips than they can sell and will be forced to shutdown plants which would kill their stock and cost a fortune to restart. At least for a little while it makes more sense to sell chips below cost than to shutdown fabrication facilities. Better to run in the red than kill your own infrastructure.

 

[kknd1967]

and no more good Dell deals to us as Dell said.
less coupon, less promotion. flat price "easy" for everyone...

I would really miss my $75 400SC deal ...

Originally posted by: Zap
I've read that Intel's super sweet deals to "Intel Only" shops ended.

 

[Viditor]

Further confirmation now from Dell and AMD...
Link

"Dell will release mobile computers running AMD's Sempron and Turion 64x2 processors in early October, representatives from both AMD and Dell, told CNET Taiwan. Initial plans will target consumer models equipped with 15.4-inch displays"

 

[DrMrLordX]

Originally posted by: Kwint Sommer

My guess is that AMD gave the classic ?deal they couldn?t refuse? which was a combination of threats to raise prices on ATI cards and very ?competitive? offers on AMD CPUs.

Huh? AMD doesn't have the market clout, even with ATI under their belt, to brow-beat anyone like that. Everyone knows that Nvidia offers a wide enough range of products to fill any niche left empty by ATI.

If Intel takes a big portion of AMD?s market share (which it could between cheap Prescotts and the Conroes)

Intel doesn't produce Prescotts anymore to my knowledge. All their P4s are now Cedar Mill chips. They might still be producing some super-cheap Prescotts as Pentium 4 5xx chips or as Celeron Ds, but that isn't the bulk of their production.

 

[zsdersw]

I suspect we'll see a lot more "enthusiasts", both here on Anandtech and elsewhere, buying Dell computers with AMD chips in them... because contrary to what they've always said about Dell, they really didn't want Dell computers because they've always had an Intel chip in them.. and now that Dell will be selling AMD systems, all of the arguments made against Dell's machines (that had nothing to do with the CPU in them) will never be made again.

 

[Viditor]

Originally posted by: DrMrLordX

Intel doesn't produce Prescotts anymore to my knowledge. All their P4s are now Cedar Mill chips. They might still be producing some super-cheap Prescotts as Pentium 4 5xx chips or as Celeron Ds, but that isn't the bulk of their production.

I believe they produce a very large number of prescotts still, they only hit 50% 65nm production last month...

 

[kknd1967]

but Intel's 90nm is not for CPU only, right?

Originally posted by: Viditor

Originally posted by: DrMrLordX

Intel doesn't produce Prescotts anymore to my knowledge. All their P4s are now Cedar Mill chips. They might still be producing some super-cheap Prescotts as Pentium 4 5xx chips or as Celeron Ds, but that isn't the bulk of their production.

I believe they produce a very large number of prescotts still, they only hit 50% 65nm production last month...

 

[SlowSpyder]

I wonder why Dell waited until now to use AMD? I could have seen if they made this switch earlier in the A64 days, when Intel's product was inferior in every way pretty much. Now Intel has an even better product then AMD and Dell just recently decided to make the switch.

 

[VivienM]

Originally posted by: SlowSpyder
I wonder why Dell waited until now to use AMD? I could have seen if they made this switch earlier in the A64 days, when Intel's product was inferior in every way pretty much. Now Intel has an even better product then AMD and Dell just recently decided to make the switch.

I've argued in the other thread about this that the reason Dell is going AMD is because Intel's courting of Apple was the last straw.

Disappointing chips, they could tolerate if the prices were good enough. But second-rate treatment compared to an upstart who starting buying Intel six months ago? That was too much. Buying a big pile of AMD processors (and matching chipsets/boards from someone who isn't Intel) will remind Intel that they need Dell more than Dell needs Intel.

 

[shamans]

Originally posted by: Zap
I've read that Intel's super sweet deals to "Intel Only" shops ended.

Yep, this is probably one of many reasons why Dell is now starting to buy AMD.

 

[imported_Questar]

Originally posted by: Viditor

Originally posted by: DrMrLordX

Intel doesn't produce Prescotts anymore to my knowledge. All their P4s are now Cedar Mill chips. They might still be producing some super-cheap Prescotts as Pentium 4 5xx chips or as Celeron Ds, but that isn't the bulk of their production.

I believe they produce a very large number of prescotts still, they only hit 50% 65nm production last month...

Link?

 

[Viditor]

Originally posted by: Questar

Originally posted by: Viditor

Originally posted by: DrMrLordX

Intel doesn't produce Prescotts anymore to my knowledge. All their P4s are now Cedar Mill chips. They might still be producing some super-cheap Prescotts as Pentium 4 5xx chips or as Celeron Ds, but that isn't the bulk of their production.

I believe they produce a very large number of prescotts still, they only hit 50% 65nm production last month...

Link?

If you do a search here in the forums, it's been linked a couple of times...

but Intel's 90nm is not for CPU only, right?

IIRC, the stories said it was 50% 65nm CPU production...I believe Intel still has quite a bit of 130nm production going on as well (for chipsets, etc...).

 

[dmens]

intel has stopped making cedarmills already, never mind prescotts. i have no idea where you read intel still makes 90nm cpu's.

 

[Viditor]

Originally posted by: dmens
intel has stopped making cedarmills already, never mind prescotts. i have no idea where you read intel still makes 90nm cpu's.

As Intel just reached the cross-over point (50% 65nm production) on June 22, 2006...
Intel PR
Stopping Cedarmills makes perfect sense (they only have half of their production in 65nm, and it's better served on other products).
This means that the other half is mainly 90nm (i.e. Prescott derivatives)...

 

[xtreme26]

i'd just buy the conroe dells than the a64 dells, that is if I had to choose one. dell would of been better off if they sold a64 comps during amds years of fame (basically during the p4 era)

 

[Viditor]

Originally posted by: xtreme26
i'd just buy the conroe dells than the a64 dells, that is if I had to choose one. dell would of been better off if they sold a64 comps during amds years of fame (basically during the p4 era)

I agree, though I still wouldn't buy any Dell (too many bad experiences with them).
I imagine though that the A64 Dells will be significantly less expensive as compensation...and let's face it, most of Dell's customers don't really care as long as the price is low.