Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
AMD Hardware

Dell Finally Goes for AMD 278

Posted by Hemos
from the had-to-happen-eventually dept.
this great guy writes "You read it correctly. It had to happen one day. According to Forbes 'Dell Inc has informed its Taiwan contract makers of plans to develop devices based on Advanced Micro Devices Inc's microprocessors, and these suppliers are awaiting orders for global shipment, the Economic Daily News reported, citing industry sources.'"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Dell Finally Goes for AMD

Comments Filter:
  • by missing_myself (857407) on Monday November 21, 2005 @08:55AM (#14080884) Journal
    Dell-inux ready for mass market
  • by MSFanBoi2 (930319) on Monday November 21, 2005 @08:55AM (#14080885)
    With the AMD lawsuit against Intel (which I think is stupid, the main reason AMD doesn't sell well is crappy marketing), Intel will have a hard time retaliating against Dell.
    More lower priced systems.
    I really want one of those XPS systems with a nice AMD processor...
    • by Skye16 (685048) on Monday November 21, 2005 @09:08AM (#14080953)
      Wait. So, you're saying the law suit is keeping intel from retailiating against dell, but that it's still stupid?

      This is exactly what the law suit was intended to do. I couldn't disagree more with your assessment concerning the validity of the suit.
      • by theStorminMormon (883615) <theStorminMormonNO@SPAMgmail.com> on Monday November 21, 2005 @09:19AM (#14080997) Homepage Journal
        Ditto that.

        If the lawsuit has managed to crack open Dell to using AMD processors because Intel has to mind its manners with a lawsuit on the horizon then even if the lawsuit doesn't procede it's done what it needed to do: level the playing field.

        It's true that AMD marketting hasn't been the best, but it's also true that Intel marketting has convinced the majority of casual users that more GHZ = more performance always. And all questions of marketing aside, I think AMD has a real case.

        -stormin
        • The most recent Intel commercials I've seen barely touch on speed. The brand name is impressed into the minds of the consumers, and that's more important than anything.
          • by theStorminMormon (883615) <theStorminMormonNO@SPAMgmail.com> on Monday November 21, 2005 @11:59AM (#14081964) Homepage Journal
            Yeah, the most recent Intel commercials are focussing on things other than speed. That's because it's finally become obvious that you can't just keep spinning the core faster. While the avg user may not undersand the importance of cache and other design features, they do understand "my laptop battery lasts 15 minutes and ignites my pants" as well as "wow - dual core sounds neat!".

            Here's the story as I rememnber it, and I'm sure there are others with more inside information and better memories out there who can complete the story:

            Intel equated processing power with core speed. This began a kind of arms race between AMD and Intel in clock speed - but the AMD message was diluted because they focussed on better chips, not just better scores. Several years ago, however, they decided to play at Intel's own game for a time and there was this huge rush to get to the 1 GHZ mark. It was in this frenzy of clock speed that Intel switched from the efficient and well-designed p3 (which they later returned to for their excellent Pentium M chip) to their wimpy but fast p4. They were able to push the p4 speeds higher than the p3 speeds and thus continue to win the "clock speed = power" battle with the public.

            It was on the foundation of this general misconception that Intel's brand was built (of course the actual marketing - as in commercials on TV - had practically no technical content whatsoever, so I'm talking about marketting in terms of their development strategy to win over the computer users who were looking for some simple number they could relate to value).

            Now, of course, with the rising supremacy of mobile computing (where the PM shines), the advent of 64-bit processors (AMD was the leader) and dual core processors (again, kudos to AMD) they have FINALLY instituted a marketting shift. This was apparent months ago when they unveiled their new road map and everything was about cycles/watt. They've got a new, slighty more complex and slightly better marketting gimmick - but it's the same old idea. The public doesn't want to read dozens of Anandtech articles detailing each new core for each new processor - they just want a guideline that makes sense. For a while it was clock speed, now it's clock speed per watt.

            You have to give them credit for clever marketting. It was because of ploys like this that their brand name became the defacto standard in CPUs, but it doesn't alter the fact that it's just a marketing ploy and that Intel has used their ability to misrepresent their chips to the detriment of actual chip design. It it weren't for AMD - where would we be now?

            Although in the final analysis - the real savior isn't AMD, it's competition.

            -stormin
      • Er, I think he means that any retaliation (fair or not) would be seen in the light of the lawsuit, independently of its merits. Which is a bad thing.

        IF the courts decide in favor of AMD, then sure. Until then, this is something on trial, and shouldn't be acted upon by the authorities -- even if we'd like them to!
    • by alienw (585907)
      the main reason AMD doesn't sell well is crappy marketing

      Or perhaps because Dell doesn't offer AMD? You do realize that Dell has by far the largest market share?
    • by LWATCDR (28044) on Monday November 21, 2005 @10:21AM (#14081289) Homepage Journal
      " With the AMD lawsuit against Intel (which I think is stupid, the main reason AMD doesn't sell well is crappy marketing),"
      That has got to be the strangest yet true statement I have ever heard in a long time. Intel's CPUs are slower, cost more, and use more power than AMDs yet they sell more. Does anyone find the power of marketing scary?
    • by drsmithy (35869)
      [...] the main reason AMD doesn't sell well is crappy marketing [...]

      No, the main reason is because *historically* (which is to say, looking at the last twenty-five years instead of the last three to five), intel has delivered better performance, better stability, better technology and been quicker to market with a more reliable supply.

      AMD has yet to prove the Athlon64 is more than a fluke (which is not to say I think it is a fluke, but AMD fanbois have a penchant for pretending AMD can do no wrong).

      • by dlZ (798734) on Monday November 21, 2005 @11:40AM (#14081841) Journal
        AMD has yet to prove the Athlon64 is more than a fluke (which is not to say I think it is a fluke, but AMD fanbois have a penchant for pretending AMD can do no wrong).

        AMD can do no wrong! I heard from a reliable source that the new chips will not only have 16 cores, but will cure cancer, do your dishes, and run under 40F!

      • AMD has yet to prove the Athlon64 is more than a fluke...

        I think they have been executing spectacularly since K7. That's K7, Opteron, and now AMD64, at a minimum. To be fair, they're kicking ass in the 64 bit area because of an /enormous/ strategic error of Intel's: ITANIUM. But AMD's execution has been very good for some time now.

        The large scale availability of their products has been a real issue of course. Chicken and the egg thing there: you cannot really expect to be able to service gargantuan market s
  • by gsonic (885510) on Monday November 21, 2005 @08:56AM (#14080888)
    It's not the GHZ speed, it's how you use it.
    • Unless... (Score:2, Insightful)

      by JamesTRexx (675890)
      ...Dell is pulling an Apple and deny everything until they launch the new AMD line of servers.

      AMD processors are already available as parts on the Dell site apparently.
      • I've searched the dell site, and found nothing. Care to back that up with a link?
        • I hate the Dell siteso I won't provide a link, but the AMD processors are in the Accessories section. Fatwallet had links to good prices that dell had on some x2 processors, that's where I first saw that dell was selling amd...

          Go figure.
    • Re:Dell rumor... (Score:5, Insightful)

      by CaymanIslandCarpedie (868408) on Monday November 21, 2005 @09:03AM (#14080932) Journal
      All they've said is "We do not comment on rumors and speculation". After years of saying "Intel only!!!", it sounds like there may be a change in attitude.

      Reminds me a bit of the White Houses change from "Rove and Libby had absolutly nothing to do with the CIA leak case!" to "We don't comment on ongoing investigations". Sometimes its whats not said that means the most.
      • Re:Dell rumor... (Score:2, Insightful)

        by JPriest (547211)
        Not commenting on rumors and speculation is no different than the way things have been. Also, Dell regularly says they are looking at the possibility of using AMD processors just to keep Intel on their feet, and to negotiate better pricing.

        There have been at least a dozen AMD/Dell false alarms so far. I will believe it after they start shipping and not a second before.

    • I'll believe it when the box arrives on my doorstep. Until then ... well, here's hoping!
  • by Quasar1999 (520073) on Monday November 21, 2005 @08:57AM (#14080898) Journal
    It's not April 1st is it?
  • by MosesJones (55544) on Monday November 21, 2005 @09:01AM (#14080913) Homepage

    And not just Rebadged Intel Chips? [slashdot.org] I mean its quite a coincidence that these stories appear just after each other on Slashdot... a sure sign of an international conspiracy surely!
    • 5, Interesting? (Score:2, Informative)

      by 4r0g (467711)
      Moderators: The parent is meant to be funny and not even shooting for a "5, Interesting". Look at the linked story, it's the one about selling celerons as P4s. Dell would probably not benefit from selling fake P4 processors in the current situation.
      • ** Necessary Karma Reply **

        When you get modded insightful for something funny, you get karma. When you get modded funny for something funny, you don't.

        Chances are, a mod wanted the grandparent-to-this post to get some karma for his wit. No harm, no foul, and now it's at +5, funny as you wished.

        HAND.
        • Not much point in karma-ing someone with an already maxed karma.

          GGP has a not-that-high UID, and a quick peek at his late comments history shows a string of +3 and +5 insightful, informative and interresting. And GGP already gets a +2 from his karma...

    • No, it's the other way round.

      Dell are going to rebadge AMD Sempr0n chips and pass them off
      as Intel P4's. The only problem is that the AMD chips will
      have better performance. Duh!

  • How long (Score:3, Insightful)

    by squoozer (730327) on Monday November 21, 2005 @09:01AM (#14080915)

    until AMD starts to become / feel like an evil giant corp then. It seems to happen to every company soon after it gets it's, or at least a, big break. It's even starting to happen to Google. The company starts off with high minded ideals grows a bit on teh back of its initially supportes then suddenly starts wanting to own everything. I suppose it's just the lure of money but it's a shame it happens. Hope it doesn't happen to AMD because my view of them, and I may well be totally wrong, is a bunch of hard working people that started off fighting a battle that everyone thought they would lose in 10 minutes flat. But through determination and quality products they have succeded in making something of themselves. Everyone loves the under-dog :o)

    • Re:How long (Score:5, Insightful)

      by zenneth (767572) on Monday November 21, 2005 @09:27AM (#14081032)
      AMD isn't exactly a garage-based company. They've had several "big breaks" already, and I can remember seeing 486 AMDs running toe-to-toe with 486 Intels. This is just another push, but we'll see if it continues, and whether it even turns out to be true. Personally, I have been building AMD machines almost exclusively for the last 10 years. I moved from AMD to Intel when the Celeron 300a made its debut, but then the Athlon pulled me back less than a year later. I'm not sure where this will take AMD, but Dell using their processors to make some high-end gaming rigs would be nice... except for the fact that they're pretty limited regarding BIOS and other system tweaks. That is the one area Dell could really make some adjustments... and the one reason I don't recommend anyone buy from a major distributor of manufactured PCs.
      • I hear what you are saying but it would, IMHO, be unwise to underestimate the importance of this for AMD. Perhaps it was just a physological barrier but it is saying to the world "yes AMD in now mature enough for everyone". Hopefully this will happen with Linux one day as well.

        The last Intel machine I owned was a 386.

    • Well as soon as they are as evil as Intel we can all root for Cyrix. Then we'll be cool again.
    • How long until AMD starts to become / feel like an evil giant corp then......Everyone loves the under-dog :o)

      That's just it, everyone loves the underdog, especially when they sell a somewhat better product at somewhat better prices. As far as I can see that is really their only redeeming quality. When trying to take on a giant like Intel, of course they are going to have to sell a more cost effective product to have any chance at all of surviving. Beyond not trying to strong arm (or bribe) any exclusiv

      • are there any examples of them being "non-evil" besides providing a good, cheap product?

        I think that's about enough to be considered non-evil now isn't it considering how most businesses carry on?

    • Re:How long (Score:5, Insightful)

      by goldspider (445116) <(moc.liamg) (ta) (97ekardra)> on Monday November 21, 2005 @10:26AM (#14081317) Homepage
      "my view of them, and I may well be totally wrong, is a bunch of hard working people that started off fighting a battle that everyone thought they would lose in 10 minutes flat."

      AMD is a multinational publicly-traded corporation whose primary goal is to make money for shareholders and expand market share.

      "I suppose it's just the lure of money but it's a shame it happens."

      You might not be aware of this, but companies need profit to survive. If your real gripe is with profit, I doubt there are many companies out there that pass your moral litmus test.
    • AMD IS a giant corporation. I don't think they're especially evil, but they long ago reached the critical size where they disappeared up their own corporate backsides. They gave their employees a keyring saying "I am the KEY to AMD!" and sent them on numerous "empowerment" courses of the type that made you wonder whether you were the only sane person, or the only mad person, in the room. My mother, who worked for AMD for a few years, was in tears after one of these courses, because she could see the poin
  • by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 21, 2005 @09:01AM (#14080916)
    Snow in Hell.
  • intel... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by CDPatten (907182) on Monday November 21, 2005 @09:02AM (#14080920) Homepage
    This is really only happening because Intel has dropped the ball so bad with server processors. Anyone know why Intel, with all their resources, didn't have a decent x64, multi-core product before AMD? Never mind one that uses fewer watts.

    It's surprising, but really should give hope to the Linux crew. This is a testament that in our society the underdog can come up and take a bite out of the front runner.... regardless of their fortunes. look out ms.
    • Re:intel... (Score:5, Insightful)

      by masklinn (823351) <slashdot.org@mas k l inn.net> on Monday November 21, 2005 @09:09AM (#14080957)
      Anyone know why Intel, with all their resources, didn't have a decent x64, multi-core product before AMD? Never mind one that uses fewer watts.

      Because Intel invested all it's brainpower into the overpriced Itanic whose incompatibility with x86-32 made every single potential buyer back from, as few people are interrested in a platform with no OS and barely a handful of apps not including your own legacy apps.

      • Re:intel... (Score:5, Informative)

        by gr8_phk (621180) on Monday November 21, 2005 @11:54AM (#14081937)
        Intels recent failures seem to include:

        1) The Itanium
        2) HT - Hyper threading - see recent articles about turning it off.
        3) The P4 long pipeline used to inflate clock speed with lower performance/cycle
        4) The new P4 core (preshot) - more watts, didn't come close to target of 5GHz.
        5) Failure to commit to x86-64 resulting in lesser performance.
        6) Late to the dual core party.
        7) Continued use of the old buss making dual cores suck
        8) Late to the integrated memory controller party (comming in like 2007).
        9) Oh, and that whole Rambus thing.

        If Intel had done what AMD did, and AMD did what Intel did, there would only be one left standing today. IMHO Intel has been living on it's brand name and huge production capacity for some time now.

    • Anyone know why Intel, with all their resources, didn't have a decent x64, multi-core product before AMD? Never mind one that uses fewer watts.

      With Microsoft set to require [slashdot.org] 64-bit on servers, perhaps Dell wanted to make sure they could take advantage of AMDs superior reputation in this arena. Sure, Intel has a solution, but the people who buy servers are far more likely to be influenced by a spec sheet than a 3-D alien or dancing dudes in bunny suits.

      TW

      • Re:intel... (Score:3, Insightful)

        by virtual_mps (62997)
        the people who buy servers are far more likely to be influenced by a spec sheet than a 3-D alien or dancing dudes in bunny suits

        Man, you must not know many purchasing managers.
    • Two points:
      1) They have obviously miscalculated with Itanium. While the architecture performs good according to reviews, it is not as superior as it should be to match its price. On top of that, the missing x86 compatibility was probably a bigger obstacle than Intel expected.
      2) In the x86 arena, Intel went for a marketing-driven architecture (P4/Xeon, "GHz sells"). This worked for a while, but eventually AMD overtook them with a more innovative design. Remember, it was AMD that went for 64bit/multicore firs
  • by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 21, 2005 @09:02AM (#14080921)
    As long as only Forbes are saying it, I would take it with a large pinch of salt. I've seen enough of their reports written by/for SCO to know they can't be relied on to check their facts.
  • No such luck (Score:5, Informative)

    by magicchex (898936) <mdanielewicz@NoSpAM.gmail.com> on Monday November 21, 2005 @09:03AM (#14080927)
    Dell Dismisses Rumors [techwhack.com].

    Dell has clarified that any rumors of it planning to manufacture a Dell PC based on AMD processors are false. Market has reported that the company had notified Taiwanese PC contract manufacturers to ready production lines to produce Dell PC systems using microprocessors made by Advanced Micro Devices Inc. the statement from the company now nullifies these rumors.

    Taiwanese companies like Hon Hai Precision Industry Co. Ltd. and Quanta Computer Inc. were mentioned in the rumor reports. Some of these Taiwanese companies are the biggest outsourced suppliers for Dell and they are usually the first one to see some of the newer products from the tech giant.

    Dell has a special business relationship with Intel, which the market analysts claim gets them huge discounts. This is also said to be the reason why Dell does not build PC products using AMD processors despite high demands for them. However, the rumors of an AMD powered Dell became stronger after Dell started selling AMD processors on their web stores sometime back.

  • by kaiwai (765866) on Monday November 21, 2005 @09:05AM (#14080939)
    Hell has just frozen over; on the spot is FOX News correspondance, and close friend of Satan, Karl Rove...

    "So Satan, it appears that hell has frozen over.."

    "NO, thats just a vicious rumour spread by enemies of the US, sorry, Hell.....things are just getting ready for Christmas.....this snow is just.....decorations.....*excellent*"

    "Really?!"

    "Yes really, so piss off...I"m trying to order my Dell AMD machine...."
  • Debateable point? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by megla (859600) on Monday November 21, 2005 @09:07AM (#14080949)
    The Register [channelregister.co.uk] are also carrying the story, and claiming that products across the range (Laptop/Desktop/Server) are being sourced.
    To me, this makes little sense. I think we can all agree that the Pentium-M is superior for laptops, so there is little point in Dell producing AMD based laptops, especially given the AMD ones will be more expensive once subsidies from Intel are accounted for.
    Desktops are a similar story - there AMD has the superior processor, but it's still going to wind up more expensive thanks to Intel.
    Servers are the only market where this seems to be a good move, as it will allow Dell to flog dual-core server rigs which Intel are currently unable to provide.
    Unless I'm mising something of course...
    • I think the thing you're missing is that The Register ia anything but a viable news source.
    • by Examancer2 (606336)
      AMD's turion chip is quite competetive against the Pentium-M... even after Dell's steep discounts. Its not quite as low power, but its much more powerful and is the ONLY low-power 64bit x86 chip on the market. Period. If Dell is looking to incorporate AMD on all system types, I'm sure they will find a healthy market for Turion notebooks... they sure beat the hell out of P4 notebooks. On the desktop side, the Sempron still just crushes the Celeron and is cheaper. Factor in Dell's discounts and they probably
  • by Ritz_Just_Ritz (883997) on Monday November 21, 2005 @09:09AM (#14080955)
    It seems whenever Dell needs more price concessions from Intel, they just have to dangle the possibility out there that they could start offering AMD-powered systems. I suspect after a few quick phone calls, Dell will get cheaper processors and this "rumour" will be relegated to the dustbin (again). Sigh...
  • by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 21, 2005 @09:09AM (#14080958)
    Dell are about low inventory and overheads. While some people didn't buy Dells because they wanted AMD chips, I doubt the number of people buying AMDs from Dell will offset the immense cost of running a much larger warehousing and manufacturing operation due to incompatibilities between part lines.
     
    I'd assume that because of this fact, AMD will most likely only appear in servers where Intel can't deliver, because if they go down to the desktop level, and there's no product differentiation, Dell will most likely find themselves in the same position as HP, who I don't buy from simply because I don't have the time to fathom the differences between 47 desktop models, 37 laptops, 53 laser printers and 73 inkjets with varying specs.
     
    Dell won out for me because they kept it simple and focused, I hope they still do that, rather than end up fighting AMD vs. Intel between their own products as others do.
    • by brxndxn (461473) on Monday November 21, 2005 @10:31AM (#14081342)
      I don't have the time to fathom the differences between 47 desktop models, 37 laptops, 53 laser printers and 73 inkjets with varying specs.

      OMG.. How the hell do you buy groceries then? There's like 40 different types of toothpaste. God.. that must scare the crap out of you.

      You're the first person I've ever heard of condemning variety..
    • Databases run better on AMD64 than they do on EMT64. Dell wants to sell more servers. They have to compete IBM (sells AMD64) Sun (AMD64). Dell doesn't want their sales to erode. They want to gain share. Customers want AMD, Dell is going to give them AMD. We own both Dell and IBM. Our database servers are IBM (AMD64) and our app servers are Dell. While I may not like Dell's support, I don't have to call them very much and am very happy with their hardware. (especially, their price!)
  • What's changed? (Score:2, Insightful)

    by cffrost (885375)
    Has Intel now promised Dell that they won't suffer punitive pricing for selling non-Intel machines?
  • by PhiltheeG (688063) on Monday November 21, 2005 @09:15AM (#14080978)

    Are they shopping for a another price break from Intel for staying with a single vendor?

  • by Lucractius (649116) <<moc.liamg> <ta> <suitcarcuL>> on Monday November 21, 2005 @09:17AM (#14080990) Journal
    I guess dell just wanted out of the space heater buisness.
  • by digitaldc (879047) * on Monday November 21, 2005 @09:21AM (#14081008)
    Is this a sign of the end of the world? Or just one of the natural processors of life?
  • by d60b9y (692396) on Monday November 21, 2005 @09:33AM (#14081055) Journal

    Let's assume for an instant that the story is correct.

    It could be that Dell have started noticing that they're losing out on contracts because of the heat that their Intel based servers are kicking out. I know of several contracts (even in my limited circle of knowledge) where the Dell submision appeared to give the most bang-per-buck, but didn't get the contract when the cost of the extra air-con was included in the total cost of ownership.

    Air-con is a non-negligible expense in any half-way serious machine room.

  • Best in class? (Score:4, Insightful)

    by LaughingCoder (914424) on Monday November 21, 2005 @09:37AM (#14081071)
    It seems to me this *would* be a smart move. Clearly there are areas where AMD is superior (servers, gaming rigs, multicore high end workstations) and areas where Intel is superior (laptops, mid-range to low-end desktops, content-encoding workstations). The only reason *not* to do something like this is if Intel gives Dell significant financial incentives (or dis-incentives) ... which I would certainly not rule out.
  • Dell Denies Rumor (Score:4, Informative)

    by everphilski (877346) on Monday November 21, 2005 @09:38AM (#14081074) Journal
    http://news.techwhack.com/2510/211135-dell-denies- possibilities-of-an-amd-based-pc/ [techwhack.com]

    Dell has clarified that any rumors of it planning to manufacture a Dell PC based on AMD processors are false. Market has reported that the company had notified Taiwanese PC contract manufacturers to ready production lines to produce Dell PC systems using microprocessors made by Advanced Micro Devices Inc. the statement from the company now nullifies these rumors.

    Taiwanese companies like Hon Hai Precision Industry Co. Ltd. and Quanta Computer Inc. were mentioned in the rumor reports. Some of these Taiwanese companies are the biggest outsourced suppliers for Dell and they are usually the first one to see some of the newer products from the tech giant.

    Dell has a special business relationship with Intel, which the market analysts claim gets them huge discounts. This is also said to be the reason why Dell does not build PC products using AMD processors despite high demands for them. However, the rumors of an AMD powered Dell became stronger after Dell started selling AMD processors on their web stores sometime back.

    )this was mentioned a few posts up but noone seemed to catch it)

    -everphilski-
  • .... As Dell recently missed their forcasts with Wall Street and their stock took a pounding as a result. They're going to need a new stream of revenue to keep their shareholders happy. Going AMD *MAY* be the best way to do that (assuming the rumor is true).
  • hold on a minute (Score:5, Insightful)

    by ruiner5000 (241452) on Monday November 21, 2005 @10:03AM (#14081196) Homepage
    That is not the title I would use for this story. Nothing is confirmed. Nothing is close to confirmed.

    While the individual listings of CPUs on Dull's site has meant nothing for years that it has happened this could be real news. The question then becomes why is this happening if indeed this story is true? Reasons could be as follows.

    1. End of the year price negotiation time with Intel.
    2. Intel's see, AMD is doing good, don't come down on use for monopolistic practices Mr. Government man.
    3. Dull finally does listen to customers after years of saying they do but lying out their teeth.

    Certainly one must wonder what exactly Dull has one their mind for a product, and clearing the server and gaming/workstation segment is where they are getting killed on performance, and performance per watt. They can Apple up their product line all they want, but with analyts on their case for a poorer than expected quarter they could legitimately be looking to save some face. Their consumer electronic attempts have largely failed, and we all remember their attempt to take over the white box market, dominated by AMD. Not too pretty a pony for them on that idea.

    Some may question if AMD has enough capacity for them. Those people haven't been paying attention. AMD has a new fab coming on line. AMD has a deal with IBM and Chartered Semiconductor for additional capacity if needed. Dull will not switch their entire product line from Intel to AMD. Anyone thinking capacity is a problem, Dull included, is foolish. This is a strictly numbers bottom line game. If AMD is hurting Intel enough, and therefor Dull enough due to outright demand, and share starts slipping, and customers start saying hello to HP, Gateway, IBM, and Sun, then something has to be done if Intel can not deliver in 2006 as it currently appears.

    Surely it could also be insurance for the antitrust suit for Intel. They could come to Dull and say ok. The heat is on. Put out one or two AMD product lines. Make a fuss about it in the media. Don't push them through your sales force. We won't take away your discount, or bump you down the product allocation totem pole, nor pull coop marketing dollars. Just the illusion of AMD and Dull being all buddy buddy, and we could see this happen until the case blows over.
  • I put an order in last night to buy AMD stock. Damn Damn Damn. Thankfully it was a limit order, but I bet it won't be filled.

  • Those responsible for sacking the people who have just been sacked, have been sacked.
  • I'll believe this when:

    * The machines are for sale as prominently as the Intel based stuff.

    * The price is competitive (or at least the same as the Intel stuff).

    * AMD's advantages are touted on the product page.

    * Someone has bought one, and found that execution is good.

    Remember, Dell also sells (or did? I lose track...) Linux machines. Supposedly.

    jh
  • I'll believe it after the first Dell system with an AMD processor has shipped and not a minute before.
  • We have a few of these, and while they're qute dandy, we could use an Opteron boost for our VMWare servers.

Aren't you glad you're not getting all the government you pay for now?

Working...