Dell Staying With Intel's Chips

[MrControversial]

I could care less.

 

[Lonyo]

Originally posted by: obsidian
It's their loss. AMD has been killing intel for a while with its opterons. Oh well, I'm sure those itanium sales make up for the loss.

Did you bother to look at the latest Anandtech benchmarks of the new Xeons vs Opteron 252's?

For dual-processor applications, Intel leads the way in everyday small to heavy transactional applications, whereas AMD shines in the analytical side of database applications "Data Warehousing".

Yes, AMD is "killing" Intel, despite Intel being a better performer in some applications.

 

[Appledrop]

intel is not going to let AMD supply dell.. think about it - dell make up most of intel's marketing - "Dell XXXX with the Powerful Intel Pentium 4 Processor do-do-do-do," and if suddenly dell's ads started saying "xxx with the Powerful AMD Athlon 128 processor <amd_tune>" the general public would think that AMD processors are better ... and id bet intels sales would drop hugely

 

[WackyDan]

" world's largest computer manufacturer, increased confidence in Intel, its sole supplier of microprocessors. "

Should say the largest PC manufacturer... calling Dell a computer manufacturer much less the largest is a flat out lie.

 

[justly]

Originally posted by: Wingznut

Originally posted by: Insomniak
Guys, this has nothing to do with Fab space. As mentioned, if AMD were offered a contract, they'd FIND a way to meet the demand.

Umm... Where do you suppose they'd all of a sudden "FIND" this capacity?

Lets get real, no one, and I mean no one, would expect Dell to sole source processors from AMD. So unless AMD is selling everything they can make as fast as they can make it there is potential for a Dell contract. If AMD does not have the capacity to supply a Dell contract then it is Dells loss for not getting an AMD contract earlier for a product that is selling as fast as it can be made.

 

[Duvie]

Originally posted by: justly

Originally posted by: Wingznut

Originally posted by: Insomniak
Guys, this has nothing to do with Fab space. As mentioned, if AMD were offered a contract, they'd FIND a way to meet the demand.

Umm... Where do you suppose they'd all of a sudden "FIND" this capacity?

Lets get real, no one, and I mean no one, would expect Dell to sole source processors from AMD. So unless AMD is selling everything they can make as fast as they can make it there is potential for a Dell contract. If AMD does not have the capacity to supply a Dell contract then it is Dells loss for not getting an AMD contract earlier for a product that is selling as fast as it can be made.

I agree....

The thing that turned the table if you actually believe this smokescreen bullshite anyways would be the introduction of 64bit processors in both xeons and desktop models....that is where vendors were probably more itchy about...

However I for one think this is a dog and pony show thrown out every once in awhile to get Intel to sell them chips at the lowest possble rate. Plus lets remember that when it says intel inside on the commercial Intel subsidizes the commercial...Heck even advertising is cheaper by selling Intel...In return for this back scratching (hand jacking) Dell promises to be monogamus with Intel!!! Ahh match made in heaven!!!

I think it reeks of collusionary practices, and ant-trust monopolies.....

Ppl know that as I owned a p4 for 3 years I still vocally spoke out against this...usually in the past that liar (should be a politician) Dell would spread vicious lies about AMD system not stable enough...BLah Blah Blah....worthless crap spewed from that point on.....

Dell systems IMO have been becoming more and more crap for sometime.....Enough said!!!


Fact is... AMD does not do enough advertising to make their name household....so Dell would have to spend more to advertise AMD systems then Intel and not get any of the normal kickback financing....More ppl unless they are familiar with AMD will still just buy Intel systems which pretty much means not many AMD systems being moved. In that respect I am sure AMD has the capacoty to meet Dell demand right now. In the end Dell will have to spend too much to try to move any of them over the Intels. In that respect I can agree with them a bit ( just a bit beyond all of the shady stuff behind the scenes no doubt), as it should not be up to them to create a name for the cpus that the stupid arses at AMD should have been doing for sometime. Pretty much the reason they will alwsy be behind INtel and never gain much marketshare.

however AMD does have an emerging name in gamers and enthusiast markets so they could seel A64 gaming systems with little ease and liekly never even need a commercial...the problem is it will make their Intel high performance machines look bad and that just wouldn't be allowed by Intel....

 

[MrCodeDude]

AMD will always be the Enthusiast's choice.

 

[Wingznut]

Originally posted by: MrCodeDude
AMD will always be the Enthusiast's choice.

I don't know if you've noticed, but "The Enthusiast's Choice" title is very cyclical. It wasn't too long ago that the Northwood owned that title.

And even still... How many enthusiasts do you know that purchase pre-build PC's?

 

[Wingznut]

I know you guys love conspiracy theories... And I realize that many people here are huge AMD fans... But the answer is really quite straightforward.



Quoted from Silicon Strategies (requires registration)

"From our discussions with customers, demand is not significant enough to force a major shift from us," Felice says. "If our customers get to the point where they are consistently telling us that they think (AMD) is a better technology, we certainly have the wherewithal to add that to the mix. We're not blind to what's out there."

Felice says AMD chips remain a relatively small piece of the market, and customers are more interested in maintaining "the stability of delivery and the stability of performance, and we have a great track record with Intel on doing just that. It's very important to us to have a consistent supply chain."

According to Mercury Research, AMD has been closing the market share gap between itself and Intel over the last two years, but remains well behind the world's largest semiconductor manufacturer.

In terms of total shipments of processors from the two companies, including Xeon, Itanium, Athlon MP and Opteron, AMD held a 3% share in the second quarter of 2003, compared to 97% by Intel. By the fourth quarter of 2004, AMD's share had grown to 7%, and Intel's had dropped to 93%.

Quoted from CNet

Intel clearly remains the market leader. In the fourth quarter, for every $100 spent on PC microprocessors, $88 went to Intel and only $9 went to AMD, according to IDC data.

Earlier this week, Dell, the world's largest PC maker, dealt a blow to AMD by saying it was no longer seriously considering using AMD chips in any of its products. Dell's chief executive said he had once leaned toward AMD but changed his mind after Intel regained its footing after a string of product delays and cancellations.

 

[tallman45]

Dell = Nasdaq
Intel = Nasdaq
AMD = NYSE

Live together, play together

Huge pressures for Dell to support their fellow market player Intel

 

[StrangerGuy]

Is that kind of news even remotely surprising?

 

[dev0lution]

"If our customers get to the point where they are consistently telling us that they think (AMD) is a better technology, we certainly have the wherewithal to add that to the mix. We're not blind to what's out there."

LOL. Considering a lot of Dell's customers think their optical drive tray is a cup holder, I'm not surprised they're not requesting a whole lot of AMD or any other "better technology".

And I love how Dell plays down their role as a market-maker. If they can get people to buy a $400 Celeron box, I'm sure they could handle a few A64 sales.

Great tactic to lock in some good pricing though

 

[BenSkywalker]

Just to back up what Wingz is saying here, there is no way AMD could supply anything but a token level of parts for Dell. AMD's capacity with their fab space is such that they are quite limited in what they can do. At one point there was talk of Fab30 having space leased out to other chip producers- talk that quickly vanished when it became apparent that they needed all of the floor space for their own parts. Fabs cost billions to build and take years, AMD is limited in how much they can produce.

For a contract like Dell, what happens if they started offering an Opteron server and it was wildly popular? How many customers want to be told their new servers are on backorder for six months and they will have to wait? Not a good way to satisfy your customers. Retooling for a huge spike in chip demands done very quickly is a couple of years- and that is if everything moves along smoothly.