Dell Finally Goes for AMD

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.'"

Nothing but good...

[MSFanBoi2]

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...

How long

[squoozer]

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)

Unless...

[JamesTRexx]

...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.

With a pinch of salt

[Anonymous Coward]

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.

Re:Dell rumor...

[CaymanIslandCarpedie]

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.

Must be renegotiation time w/Intel again

[Ritz_Just_Ritz]

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...

Re:intel...

[masklinn]

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.

What's changed?

[cffrost]

Has Intel now promised Dell that they won't suffer punitive pricing for selling non-Intel machines?

Must be negotiating with Intel again...

[PhiltheeG]

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

Re:Loyalty

[masklinn]

What matters is the price point here. We don't buy AMD because they're "better" than Intel - a clock is a clock. They're no more or less stable, no better supported. We buy them because they're cheaper.

Duh, no, people DO buy AMD because it's "better". Only Intel's marketting droids and retarded monkeys used to think that "a clock is a clock". AMD chips have been outperforming Intel's for years now, clock for clock (shall I remind you that top of the line P4 reach 4GHz and still get their balls busted by Athlon64 who have yet to reach 3GHz out of the box?)

People buy AMD because they feature

• Better overall performances per $
• Much better performance per watt
• A "true" dual core in the case of AthlonX2 and dual core Opterons
• Used to be the only chips handling both 32 and 64-bit (and managed that as while still beating the crap of the purely 32-bit P4 in 32-bit apps)

Last thing about the performance/clock thing: Pentium-M beat the living shit out of P4 clock for clock 95% of the time.

Shame Intel didn't work on scaling them to high frequencies, 2.5GHz-ish desktop Pentium-M would at least put some kind of fight against Athlon64 chips.

Re:Nothing but good...

[theStorminMormon]

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

Re:Loyalty

[Shoeler]

We don't buy AMD because they're "better" than Intel - a clock is a clock. They're no more or less stable, no better supported. We buy them because they're cheaper.

Wrong - you're a victim to Intel's marteting. Take, for example, the highest-end Athlon single core, compared to the highest-end Intel single core - the FX-57 vs the EE 3.73Ghz. The FX-57 runs at 2.8Ghz. The EE at 3.73 Ghz - the FX-57 running some 25% slower - in pure clock speed. Let's say they have identical performance (they don't) - then the AMD would perform better - significantly so - per "clock" as you say. Based on results from spec.org - the FX-57 runs between 1929 and 1970 for SPECint2000 scores and between 1894 and 2261 in SPECfp2000 (the higher of the SPECfp score is on a 64-bit linux distro with a high-end compiler - the low-end on a Windows XP system, presumably 32-bit). The Intel EE gets 1796 on SPECint2000 (xp SP2) and 2016 on SPECfp2000 (xp SP2). So the AMD beats it by 10% in SPECint2000 (using the average of the FX-57's scores) and gets beat on the Intel-preferred platform by 10%. I call it a draw in terms of performance and the AMD does it with a 50% slower clock.

Unless you mean some other clock. :)

Re:How long

[zenneth]

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.

Re:Cheaper?

[rosewood]

Dell's prices are pretty damn low. Catch the right deal and you get an Intel CPU and the rest of the computer for $50 more. (Well, at least it was at one point).

Anyways, anyone who builds their own boxes knows that AMD is cheaper then Intel. I hope this price difference carries over to the full systems Dell will offer.

Quite frankly, I don't give a shit if it is cheaper or not. I have to order from Dell all of the fucking time and I am giddy about the prospect of being able to go back to AMD only ordering. Why anyone wouldn't go with something that is faster and cheaper is beyond me.

Best in class?

[LaughingCoder]

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.

Re:And for Celerons disguised as P4.

[Spacejock]

I look around my home and workplace and all I see these days is AMD. I'm responsible for purchasing in both places (and also advise many others - family, friends, school), and while 2 or 3 years ago I would always suggest intel now it's AMD for just about everything. (They do say free advice is worth what you pay for it, but I research their needs as carefully as I research my own.)
The Athlon64 chip with cool and quiet swung it for me. Very hot climate, struggling aircon and red-hot cpu do not make for a happy pc - or user.

Re:Nothing but good...

[xouumalperxe]

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!

hold on a minute

[ruiner5000]

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.

Re:How long

[n00tz]

until AMD starts to become / feel like an evil giant corp

they are THE alternative to Intel. They've already become one of those "giant corps"

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)

Maybe it's just me, but that is exactly how I see Google. I fully accept that I may be a minority of that view. I'd like to kick myself for not investing in stock much much earlier.

I've read through google-watch and to be honest I think they are trolling for attention from a company like google. The biggest issue is the fact that google is soaking up all this information and some of you conspiracy theorists out there are worried about all that implied power it gives them. We need to be able to trust someone, and just because they have tracking cookies that don't expire until 2038 does not mean they have ill-intentions for such information. Their research is arguably the best psycho-sociological data we can get.

Think of it this way, if it gets leaked that they are abusing their power (and it would get leaked with as many employees and exposure they have) people would drop the use of Google, and possibly internetworking, quicker than a hot iron. Where would they be able to profit from that? Secondly, we are required to pay ICANN for ALL of our domain names, why do we trust them over a service that is fairly voluntary such as google.

The playboy interview [kottke.org] gives insight to what the top guys at Google are really intending.

Re:Nothing but good...

[LWATCDR]

" 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?

Re:How long

[goldspider]

"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.

Re:Nothing but good...

[drsmithy]

[...] 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).

Re:It didn't really have to happen

[brxndxn]

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..

Re:Debateable point?

[Examancer2]

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 cost about the same, but there is still a performance advantage to the Sempron. On the low end, AMD still makes more sense. Gaming desktops... well, that should be a no brainer why AMD makes sense there. Pricing issues aside, they are the fastest gaming chips around. If Dell wants a gaming rig performance crown, they'll use AMD. And as you mentioned, AMD has much more compelling server chips. Intel recently launched their dual core Xeons, but since they are based on the horrible dual core P4's, they can't touch the opteron... clock for clock, dollar for dollar, or however you want to compare it... The Xeon is overpriced flaming (as in really freakin hot) peice of crap... at least when compared to the competition. Even if AMD didn't have a performance advantage on servers, the power savings and reduced heat alone are enough to make them attractive in many data centers. Add to that the fact that they do have a MAJOR performance advantage... its just a no brainer and makes Dell look pretty silly for waiting this long... if this all isn't just another hoax. Either way, I have little respect for Dell.

This, is complete horse-shit.

[Anonymous Coward]

AMD has beaten Intel where marketing makes a difference, at Retail. It was only recently reported here on Slashdot that AMD had surpassed Intel in retail sales. And everyone poo-pooed it because it doesn't include the OEM manufacturers like Dell. So clearly AMD's marketing is working if they're outpacing Intel in the retail channel.

Getting Dell to ship AMD Boxes has nothing to do with marketing and EVERYTHING to do with Intel's anti-trust behaviour, and back-room dealings. Marketing by AMD has no impact on whether Dell will ship AMD Boxes (most of the other boxed OEM's already ship AMD based systems).

Re:Cheaper?

[Stunning Tard]

Once this well kept secret (oxymoron?) of cheaper & better AMD chips gets out to the masses I'd expect the value of AMD chips to drop in comparison to Intel. Will Intel come down in price? Will AMD go up?

Likely they'll meet somewhere in the middle. Events like Dell will shake things up. Demand for AMD will go up but will their supply go up to match it? If demand for Intel goes down will they be forced to lower prices?

Regardless, it seems the days are short for the informed consumer getting a far better deal with AMD.

Re:Dell rumor...

[JPriest]

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.

Re:Nothing but good...

[Martin Blank]

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.

Re:intel...

[virtual_mps]

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.

Re:Nothing but good...

[Courageous]

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 surge until... you are.

Anyway, that's my story, and I'm stickin' to it.

C//

Re:This, is complete horse-shit.

[MSFanBoi2]

As you said, teh retail numbers really don't count because they DON'T include Dell (or any other mail/web order sales outlet).

So it's not looking at all the real numbers, only a small subsection of them.

Re:This, is complete horse-shit.

[BrianB]

I think his point was, that in the one place where marketing has an effect AMD is outpacing Intel. Where consumers directly make a choice about their processor, AMD is doing well.

So, if you're talking about marketings effectiveness (which we were) then these are the real numbers you want to look at.

If you buy into the monopolistic view of Intel, then this is exactly what you would expect to see. AMD does well in direct to consumer marketing and Intel rules the world of the leveraged backroom deal.

Re:Real Men Use AMD

[Grishnakh]

Look at P4's outrageously long pipeline that got nowhere whenever you need to branch.

What's wrong with that? As long as you're using software that doesn't need to branch often, this shouldn't be a problem. That's why the P4 always excels at tasks such as video encoding.

Wait, people don't usually use computers for video encoding? Never mind then...