What'd Dell use in it's laptops if not Merom? A Turion?? I could be wrong, but I've heard nothing spectacular about AMD laptops. I mean, Merom's gonna be the laptop chip to get in 06H2.
According to The Inquirer , Intel has alloted its initial batch of Merom chips to Apple and Lenovo exclusively. This prompted Dell to sign a huge deal with AMD. I know the source is not very credible but it is still fun to speculate.
I think this is false. Dell cares about Merom but the real reason why they went AMD was because they didn't have anything to compete with Opteron 4-Way servers.
Dell was easy to beat because the Netburst Xeons are easy to beat in overall speed and and scalability.
I think this is false. Dell cares about Merom but the real reason why they went AMD was because they didn't have anything to compete with Opteron 4-Way servers.
Dell was easy to beat because the Netburst Xeons are easy to beat in overall speed and and scalability.
That's the way I understand it as well. I listened to Rollins (Dell CEO) on CNBC the day they announced that Dell would use AMD chips. He said they would use them for some server models and really gushed about Intel's Core 2 chips. Maybe things have changed since then, this was about a month ago. If Dell uses AMD chips in their desktop models that would be a real feather in AMD's cap and a blow to Intel.
Dell's a little too late to the party for the Desktop. AMD doesn't have anything that's going to beat Conroe coming for a while. Intel has closed the gap and shut the door.
AMD's big change is AM2 (DDR2 support) and that's not yielding huge performance improvements.
However Dell is going to love attacking the 4-Way because that's were the margin starts to get fun.
Dell's a little too late to the party for the Desktop. AMD doesn't have anything that's going to beat Conroe coming for a while. Intel has closed the gap and shut the door.
AMD's big change is AM2 (DDR2 support) and that's not yielding huge performance improvements.
He's so biased that if Intel came out with a chip with 60-80% better performance per watt than AMD that he would classify the results as "paid pumping by Intel". Oh, wait... it's here, it's delivering those numbers, it's called the Xeon 5100 series... and he's still doing that.
Back to the main topic... I can bet that Dell will use AMD in their laptops come this fall, even though Turion 64 X2 is very power-hungry when compared to Core 2 Duo (Merom). I'm pretty sure that we'll see by the time WWDC rolls around (if not shortly afterwards) Apple's grand plans for Core 2 Duo and the reason why they and Lenovo have eaten up most of the first month's production run.
But, then again, the inferior Dell Inspiron Turion X2 notebooks will sell quite well. Dell has a reputation of grinding up Purina Dog Chow, forming it into a burger patty, putting the Dog Chow patty on a bun, and serving it to the masses as a hamburger.
Dell's a little too late to the party for the Desktop. AMD doesn't have anything that's going to beat Conroe coming for a while. Intel has closed the gap and shut the door.
It's really more about price than performance. Intel is going to be practically giving away P4 chips for the rest of the year, and Dell most like likely got a very favorable deal from AMD for low-end chips. We're probably going to see $200 PCs this Christmas, and $400 laptops. They will still use Core 2 for higher end machines.
It's really more about price than performance. Intel is going to be practically giving away P4 chips for the rest of the year, and Dell most like likely got a very favorable deal from AMD for low-end chips. We're probably going to see $200 PCs this Christmas, and $400 laptops.
Dell is pretty close to those price points right now. They sell basic notebook and desktops for $499 and $299 respectively. I think your prediction is going to come pretty close with this Summer's and Fall's price war between AMD and Intel. Intel is going to drive dual core prices down into the basement, and AMD will do everything it can to hang on.
All those single core chips are going to be cheap, cheap, cheap! <$50$ cheap. The world will be awash in cheap single-core systems.
Quote:
They will still use Core 2 for higher end machines.
Not only that, Dell will still use Intel CPUs at every one of it price points from the $200 desktop to $10k+ 4 socket servers.
It's quite doubtful that they will have an exclusive arrangement with AMD. That'll be company suicide. But they'll try to sell a machine of any x86 variety to anyone who wants one.
It's common sense really. How much margin is in 50 lowend PCs versus a few 4-way servers.
It was pretty easy to beat the Intel based Dell 4-way box with an AMD box because no only was the Opteron box faster to a chip but it scaled much better than a 4-way Xeon system. And it was easy to prove with benchmarks.
I'm not sure I'm buying the whole "Lenovo and Apple are getting the lion's share of Merom so Dell pickup up AMD" spiel. If you're a sane ISV you wouldn't go dumping Intel for AMD in the laptop arena. Intel's lead there is substantial enough that even Dell won't be able to confuse the masses into thinking a dual-core Athlon laptop is superior to a Merom based one.
Without knowing what Dell's prices are, either situation is reasonable. I do find the Inq to be very reliable, though. Plus, giving Mermon to the two highest-end laptop companies first makes sense.
Quote:
Originally posted by hmurchison
It's common sense really. How much margin is in 50 lowend PCs versus a few 4-way servers.
Dell's business model really relies on both -- they pitch business desktops at cost or lower in order to get the server business. In order to do this, they need both competitive servers and really cheap desktops. Keep in mind, in the corporate desktop MS Office market, nobody really cares about how fast it is or how many cores it has -- price and supportability are the make-or-break factors. Core Solo will probably be a big winner just due to electricity costs alone.
The other thing is that 4-Socket systems are a small, and shrinking, portion of the server market. It sounds like Woodcrest will be plenty competitive for the more common 2S systems.
Comments
Dell was easy to beat because the Netburst Xeons are easy to beat in overall speed and and scalability.
Originally posted by hmurchison
I think this is false. Dell cares about Merom but the real reason why they went AMD was because they didn't have anything to compete with Opteron 4-Way servers.
Dell was easy to beat because the Netburst Xeons are easy to beat in overall speed and and scalability.
That's the way I understand it as well. I listened to Rollins (Dell CEO) on CNBC the day they announced that Dell would use AMD chips. He said they would use them for some server models and really gushed about Intel's Core 2 chips. Maybe things have changed since then, this was about a month ago. If Dell uses AMD chips in their desktop models that would be a real feather in AMD's cap and a blow to Intel.
AMD's big change is AM2 (DDR2 support) and that's not yielding huge performance improvements.
However Dell is going to love attacking the 4-Way because that's were the margin starts to get fun.
Originally posted by hmurchison
Dell's a little too late to the party for the Desktop. AMD doesn't have anything that's going to beat Conroe coming for a while. Intel has closed the gap and shut the door.
AMD's big change is AM2 (DDR2 support) and that's not yielding huge performance improvements.
Unless, of course, you're talking to this blogger.
He's so biased that if Intel came out with a chip with 60-80% better performance per watt than AMD that he would classify the results as "paid pumping by Intel". Oh, wait... it's here, it's delivering those numbers, it's called the Xeon 5100 series... and he's still doing that.
Back to the main topic... I can bet that Dell will use AMD in their laptops come this fall, even though Turion 64 X2 is very power-hungry when compared to Core 2 Duo (Merom). I'm pretty sure that we'll see by the time WWDC rolls around (if not shortly afterwards) Apple's grand plans for Core 2 Duo and the reason why they and Lenovo have eaten up most of the first month's production run.
But, then again, the inferior Dell Inspiron Turion X2 notebooks will sell quite well. Dell has a reputation of grinding up Purina Dog Chow, forming it into a burger patty, putting the Dog Chow patty on a bun, and serving it to the masses as a hamburger.
Originally posted by hmurchison
Dell's a little too late to the party for the Desktop. AMD doesn't have anything that's going to beat Conroe coming for a while. Intel has closed the gap and shut the door.
It's really more about price than performance. Intel is going to be practically giving away P4 chips for the rest of the year, and Dell most like likely got a very favorable deal from AMD for low-end chips. We're probably going to see $200 PCs this Christmas, and $400 laptops. They will still use Core 2 for higher end machines.
Originally posted by IntlHarvester
It's really more about price than performance. Intel is going to be practically giving away P4 chips for the rest of the year, and Dell most like likely got a very favorable deal from AMD for low-end chips. We're probably going to see $200 PCs this Christmas, and $400 laptops.
Dell is pretty close to those price points right now. They sell basic notebook and desktops for $499 and $299 respectively. I think your prediction is going to come pretty close with this Summer's and Fall's price war between AMD and Intel. Intel is going to drive dual core prices down into the basement, and AMD will do everything it can to hang on.
All those single core chips are going to be cheap, cheap, cheap! <$50$ cheap. The world will be awash in cheap single-core systems.
They will still use Core 2 for higher end machines.
Not only that, Dell will still use Intel CPUs at every one of it price points from the $200 desktop to $10k+ 4 socket servers.
It's quite doubtful that they will have an exclusive arrangement with AMD. That'll be company suicide. But they'll try to sell a machine of any x86 variety to anyone who wants one.
Conroe is cheap enough to deliver good midrange desktop perforamnce and Intel is letting people use Core Solo/Duo in desktops as well for the low end.
THT is right they'd just about have to be selling those solo chips for beans.
Originally posted by hmurchison
The AMD play for Dell isn't the volume consumer desktop/laptop.
The Inq is reporting otherwise. We'll see.
Originally posted by IntlHarvester
The Inq is reporting otherwise. We'll see.
It's common sense really. How much margin is in 50 lowend PCs versus a few 4-way servers.
It was pretty easy to beat the Intel based Dell 4-way box with an AMD box because no only was the Opteron box faster to a chip but it scaled much better than a 4-way Xeon system. And it was easy to prove with benchmarks.
I'm not sure I'm buying the whole "Lenovo and Apple are getting the lion's share of Merom so Dell pickup up AMD" spiel. If you're a sane ISV you wouldn't go dumping Intel for AMD in the laptop arena. Intel's lead there is substantial enough that even Dell won't be able to confuse the masses into thinking a dual-core Athlon laptop is superior to a Merom based one.
Originally posted by hmurchison
It's common sense really. How much margin is in 50 lowend PCs versus a few 4-way servers.
Dell's business model really relies on both -- they pitch business desktops at cost or lower in order to get the server business. In order to do this, they need both competitive servers and really cheap desktops. Keep in mind, in the corporate desktop MS Office market, nobody really cares about how fast it is or how many cores it has -- price and supportability are the make-or-break factors. Core Solo will probably be a big winner just due to electricity costs alone.
The other thing is that 4-Socket systems are a small, and shrinking, portion of the server market. It sounds like Woodcrest will be plenty competitive for the more common 2S systems.