Slashdot Mirror
AMD Tops Intel in U.S. Retail Sales
jimmydins writes "According to digitimes.com, AMD Surpassed Intel in US Retail Sales for the month of September." From the article: "After facing what seemed an insurmountable decline in desktop PC sales during the first six months of 2005, Advanced Micro Devices (AMD) captured a 52% share of the US retail desktop PC market in September, according to Current Analysis. AMD's performance during the back-to-school shopping season topped chip giant Intel's 46% share by six points, said the market research firm. Despite its past successes in surpassing Intel desktop sales in select retail sales weeks, September 2005 marked the first time AMD was able to outperform Intel for an entire month, the research firm stated." In order to keep this in perspective, C|Net points out that this doesn't include direct PC sales, so no Dell sales are included in these numbers. Good showing for AMD just the same, though.
Seems like an incredibly flawed survey.
Fun to play with numerical, isn't it?
What a ridiculous article. Retail sales are meaningless without integrating direct sales (Dell, etc). I run two retail stores (not in IT) and if you based anything on my sales and ignored our e-commerce competition, you'd be predictably wrong.
First, retailers will generally maximize margins buy promoting less expensive costing products. E-commerce generally runs tight margins on everything.
Example: Intel Retail PC retails for $799, cost is $619. AMD Retail PC retails for $749, cost is $549. The retailer sees a $10 better margin on the AMD but reduces gross sales. Which one will the consumer pick, generally? Whatever is cheap.
Don't believe any sales figures any more. They're ignorant of the true market, which is retail, e-commerce, eBay, and buying in pieces from your local OEM "wholesaler."
Just basing figures like these on whatever market gives you the best results is more to keep shareholders happy.
So, exactly what victory is had here? AMD beat Intel in retail sales? Is that units (cpu's) shipped? Is it gross sales? And, the article says this doesn't include direct sales from vendors like Dell. Hwah? That sounds like a pretty large chunk of total sales of processors to be glibly claiming victory. What percentage of Dell's PCs ship with Intel vs. AMD and what effect does that have on the total numbers?
As for winning in retail sales, to me this is more market spin (seemingly of which many slashdot articles are) and little real information. When I talk to people who are going to buy, or have bought a PC recently I virtually never hear them discussing the finer points of their decision to buy a particular brand or processor, mostly because 99% of PC consumers don't know and don't care what the processor is (though they really should when it comes to something like a Celeron).
So to me this just means AMD has been successful in getting their products on the eye-level shelves in the stores. Customers are buying what looks sexy, and what costs the least.
I've been happy with a couple of AMD machines I've purchased and I like that AMD continues to compete with Intel and hope AMD keeps Intel from becoming the Microsoft of the chip industry (some claim they already have), but I can't pull much real or meaningful information from this article.
Nothing to see here, move along.
Selectively choose the input data set, and I can make the numbers say anything.
I really wish I had an amd in this laptop, but intel makes a pretty good mobile chip.
Still, suprising that AMD topped intel
I sold my AMD shares (all my money was in AMD) at 16.20 a few months ago after losing hope..
--- We need more Ron Paul!
Tezkah reports: Chef Tezkah holds the record this week for most meals sold! He captured 52% of the meal market for the first six months of 2005. Congratulations Chef Tezkah! Its important to note that this doesn't include any meals sold in restaurants, but good showing for Tezkah just the same.
"Dude! Buy a Dell already!"
The other end of the computer-buying public are gamers, who already know that they better go with a top-notch AMD64. Those people don't ask me anything anyway, but AMD is simply "the gamers choice".
Intels customer base only are OEM manufacturers that target the business market. They still get credit for being more stable, which I don't understand because all my AMD machines - from a K6-II 333Mhz, over 2xAMD MP 2400+ to a couple of AMD64 (2400+ to 3400+) just run perfectly fine.
The other consumers are those that don't ask their Geek friends and only know Intel from the commercials, so it "must be good". (They also think that "Centrino" is a processor, because of the sticker on their machine). That said: I never saw an AMD commercial in my whole life. Do they exist?
AMD just kicks in the performance/€ factor, and CPU performance has become less important in the last few years. So if you want to save some money, just buy a slower CPU. It's just that simple. ;-)
Oh, I just see that it doesn't include OEM machines (sorry, didn't read the story entirely). Most definately AMD will kick in the self-buidling crowd. AMD is popular with them... (performance/€ + easy overclocking possibilities. Who builds a PC himself with an Intel CPU anyway?
Ahhh...the great dumpster continuum. Many a free computer will be found there. -- sowth (748135)
This had to be expected. AMD processors are good, it's normal that their popularity increases.
But wait until Apple switches to Intel CPUs!!!
What this says is that AMD is making serious inroads on Intel. Just a few years ago, AMD beating Intel at anything, by any metric, would have been laughable.
I think it is not so surprising that AMD sells more Retail CPUs than Intel, considering their cheap prices, their great performance and the cheapness of their motherboards/chipsets. They are the perfect home system. However, when you consider than the vast majority of PCs sold in America and troughout the world are trought direct sales (say Dell) as the Ed implied, and through wholesale (Businesses), AMD is marginalized.
Why? Because they can't promise the same level of production as Intel does. They do not produce their own motherboards, and while some third-party manufacturers produce some great silicon, most are abobinable pieces of flaky crap. For most mom'n'pop users at home, stability and performance don't matter too much, and those $40-60 MoBos are a bargain.
Anyway, props to AMD for their successes!
There's no doubt that this is only a portion of the battle between the two manufacturers, but the point is that 5 years ago, AMD was getting slaughtered by every measure. They weren't even a factor.
Now, they've caught up to Intel by atleast a couple metrics. That's not insignificant, especially considering that retail sales have a strong correlation to "mindshare" amongst consumers, as pointed out by a sibling poster.
Not quite as interesting though as "Excite.com makes comeback, surpasses Google in usage". Grr slow news day. Hrmm is AMD gear as reliable these days as Intel? That's always been why I've gone Intel.. And I just read that mac-Mini's use AMD.. Could this be giving them a big boost?
~jennifer.k~
I agree that this survey do not give the whole picture. AMD is growing you all got to see their third quarter profit
Well this is good, but at the same time all Dell sales is Intel chips. So if you factor them in they are not really on top. But I am sure they will get there some time soon.
being the Pentium-DRM have contributed to Intel's fall from grace in the marketplace. I also hope AMD will read the lesson, lest Cyrix or some heretofore unknown Chinese manufacturer becomes the ascendent chip supplier to those who would still like general purpose computers as opposed to *AA controlled media delivery devices.
One CPU cycle wasted on digital restrictions management is ONE TOO MANY.
I think the 'brand importance' and 'Hz' of CPU seems less and less of a factor in deciding which computer to buy, compare to 3-5 years ago, especially most computers today are fast enough for whatever majority consumers intend to do, AMD is around for years, and the Hz just doesn't pop up as advertised by Intel/AMD.
..... Does this make AMD money? After all, the comsumer computer business tends to have VERY low margins. AFAIK, AMD doesn't have much mindshare in the moneymaking enterprise market (although to be fair they are trying to push that at the moment) So if AMD is discounting the hell out of these chips to gain mindshare, are they making money? If not, how long can they continue to do so?
This is my opinion. To make sure you don't steal it, it's covered by the DMCA.
Intel needs to go back-to-school to figure this one out...
Laptops are now outselling desktops, and AMD has lagged behing Intel in its portable chips designs. Now, a breakdown based on the numbers of CPUs shipped would be interesting.
Make love, not reality television.
BINGO.
Intel lets AMD fill their fab with ZERO margin product.
Does that include retail laptop sales as well?
Then don't buy a PC with an AMD processor. Simple; what are you complaining about?
If I have nothing to hide, you have no reason to search me
While I think a full out celebration would be premature, this same set of numbers showing an increase from a previous data set is still a positive sign...isn't it?
Greatness. It comes in many forms, sometimes it comes in the form of sacrifice - that's the loneliest form.
Why? Because they can't promise the same level of production as Intel does.
... just about anything that goes into a Dell PC. Why do you hold AMD to standards that are not required for other electronics manufacturers? As long as AMD has an open relationship with other motherboard manufacturers where technical specs are available to make appropriate motherboards, then so what if AMD doesn't make their own? If certain mobo manufacturers don't make quality products, then don't buy from them. Buy from competitors. Don't blame AMD for bad products from other companies.
AMD just opened a new manufacturing facility in Germany that, if I recall correctly, will be able to product 100 million more chips per year. Whether that's CPUs or IC chips I don't know, but it's clear that AMD is growing. That's still not going to overtake Intel any time soon, but it's encouraging.
And so what if AMD doesn't produce their own motherboards? Okay, Intel has the facilities to do both. So what? Why does that matter? Dell doesn't manufacture their own hard drives or memory chips or
The Overrated mod is for reversing inappropriate, positive mods, not for voicing disagreement with a post.
People still buy from Dell, but more and more people are building their own systems, or having someone build one for them.
Now for people to argue with me about how much "bang" you get for a "buck" ....
Note: Take into account the amount of money saved through popular amd chipsets (IE: nforce). It's not a lot, but it is something. Plus you're cool because you have something your neighbors don't which is nearly priceless.
Ignore the "p2p is theft" trolls, they're just uninformed
But what these number DO show is consumer sentiment towards the AMD brand. Retail sales are great for showing what is going through a consumer's mind when browsing for a computer. If they are purchasing AMD in retail outlets, that means that the AMD vs. Intel FUD is relatively mute. I'm not arguing for either side, I'm simply happy to see AMD able to compete in what is usually the toughest sale-- the real sales floor.
"Politicians find new names for institutions which under old names have become odious to the people."
whats these numbers prove is where customers have a choice they are choosing AMD. Big deal I think concidering the stregnth of Intel's add campains. This reminds me of Coke vs. Pepsi
Commercial Idea (c) myself 2005, i hereby grant exclusive, permanent, non-revokable license for use to AMD.
---
The typical hare and turtle cartoon race. But they're in racing cars. The Hare starts first in its "Famous inside" car. The turtle starts next, and its car reads: "AMD powered."
The race starts, and we see the hare pushing the gas to the bottom. But when it looks back, there's no turtle! Where is it? Oh, the turtle just crossed the finish line! The hare's jaw drops as the turtle is already being cheered by the fans and given the gold medal.
The hare opens the race car, and sees (instead of the engine), an AMD CPU.
The tagline: "AMD. Faster." (When the phrase is said, the background switches to a bar chart comparing "AMD" and "Other", showing AMD is faster)
---
Seriously, if AMD wants to win the market, they should start making TV and radio commercials. Remember what happened to the Amiga. It was a superior product, but lack of marketing lead to bankruptcy.
Only when customers start asking for "AMD processors", vendors will start using them.
I don't see how Dell can possibly count for anything since they refuse to (or are contractually forbidden to) sell AMD processors.
Technoli
However, no fast food joints like MacDonalds or Burger King were included in this survey.
It doesn't matter what set of data was picked.
Comparing Apple's to Apple's in the same data set, AMD won. Period.
And no, I don't think it's indicitive of the actual market, but it is a noteworthy sign. (pun anyone?)
I'm pretty sure these statistics were prepared on a PC with one of those faulty Pentiums.
org.slashdot.post.SignatureNotFoundException: ewg
On behalf of the less-bigoted, may I say I am ecstatic that there are two (three?) cpu companies to choose from. This means I can buy whoever's cpus are currently the best and that there is competition to make them all try harder. For those of you who [hate Intel | love AMD | hate AMD | love Intel] I only hope you actually benefit from this chauvinism. Perhaps you have shares in one or the other. Perhaps you work for one or the other. Whatever. The rest of us should be buying on the merits of whatever is currently available. I am buying AMD64 cpus at the moment. Prior to that I was buying AMD Athlons. Prior to that I was buying Pentium IIIs. I have also had good success with Cyrix in the past. Lave the bigots to scream and shout. Please buy on technical merits. May the best cpu manufacturer of the moment win.
Wrong. Do you have any idea what the margins are on Opteron chips? It's like printing money. Given the red-hot demand for Opterons right now, do you honestly think AMD would scale back production on those to fill their fabs with low-end, low-margin chips? Not a chance. They'll make high-end parts first, then fill up the remaining capacity with lower-end chips.
Apple has doomed Intel, anything they're involved in (except for music) is destined for 5% marketshare.
Intel's strong suit right now is its laptop processors, and who buys those at retail? AMD's strong suit are desktop processors, which are what people put into home built computers.
"My head hurts, My feet stink, and I dont love Jesus." -Jimmy Buffett
After 10+ years of being a pure Intel shop sans some toaster applicances, we have been a pure Intel shop when it comes to personal computers.
We just switched to AMD. We purchased 100 in the last month. I can get a feature rich AMD for $100 less than a feature poor power hungry Intel. $100x100 units a month adds up.
The HP dx5150 sff are great little machines for workstation use.
But I'd like to know the BIG picture. In terms of total x86 based CPU's what is the share sold by AMD? I know it will still be small, but then at least I can go to older news items and compare apples to apples (or Apples to Dells).
Think Deeply.
It's not like they hide the fact that it's only retail sales. It tells you different things than a "whole computer market" survey. What a "complete" survey would include isn't exactly clear either, would big iron fit in? Anyway, retail is a good number for seeing what home users are doing in the marketplace. Yes, some home users go to Dell, but by in large, they buy retail. So, in the past when AMD's share was smaller and shrinking, we could guess that Intel's "Intel Inside" or "Centrino" or big Mhz or something else was working. Now, with AMD share growing, either the home consumer is thinking more highly of AMD, or maybe they just don't know either way and buy whatever is on the shelves.
Anyway, my point is that this survey is as valid as any other as long as you think of it in the proper perspective.
The problem is that AMD's slogin is not "AMD Powered" but "AMD Me." That might also explain the lack of advertising, as I can not imagine any effective ad including the phrase "AMD Me." Whenever I hear that phrase, I imagine myself back in grade 2, with the school bully having just finished beating me up and calling me homosexual in various insulting ways. Then, as he is walking away, he turns around and says, "AMD Me!" I'm sure it's an insult of some kind, although I can't figure it out exactly any more than I could figure out exactly why the biggest grade 6 kid always picked on the smallest grade 1 and 2 kids.
Did you not know that Intel is using the AMD64 extension in some of their chips?
I'm not sure if you're trolling or trying to be funny.
You not heard of this instruction set called AMD64 that Intel happen to be using at the moment?
For all intensive porpoises your a bunch of rediculous loosers
Laptops are huge - desktop markets have plateaued, but the number of laptops sold, and their portion of the entire market for personal computers, is growing constantly.
Saying that AMD has overtaken Intel in a declining market is not saying much. While Intel certainly hasn't given up on the desktop market, they do know that desktops are the past and laptops are the future.
Further, as has been said, the lack of direct sales data is pretty weak. That's like saying "More computers are sold with OSX installed than Windows, if we ignore every market channel other than the Apple.com store!" Well, okay, it's not THAT bad, but it's leaving out a huge chunk of the market.
Since I can't tell them apart, I treat all ACs as the same person.
Copyright and Patent Law, which has led AMD and Intel to form cross licensing agreements instead of suing each other for dozens of things.
Tonights forecast: Dark. Continued dark throughout most of the evening, with some widely-scattered light towards morning
IMO AMD's are crap. They've always been crap.
uhh.. right. whatever you say.
Every time Intel spends several billion dollars devising a new instruction set, AMD knocks off a copy.
AFAIK the last update of x86 - x86-64 was copied by Intel from AMD.
Funny, I haven't replaced a hell of a lot of either in my sixteen years as a consultant. Could it be that you're either:
a. buying piss poor systems for your customers and thus suck at evaluating what constitutes a "good" machine
-or-
b. assembling systems from scratch and simply don't know what you're doing
I've got three AMDs running in my home lab alone along with scores in the field and haven't had an issue, and I've been running AMD chips since the 386-40. And for overall failure rates I've had NOTHING as bad as Intel based Dells in the last year.. they're a joke on both the server and workstation front.
Ah, to be the Dell CEO and snorting lines off a hooker's ass ...
Let us look at these numbers. They exclude most of the market (I know very few people that buy retail computers). I am not suprized that AMD beat intel in the retail market. Most people that are buying preconfigured boxes from a retail store are usually looking for a cheap computer. AMD will win in this case.
I think this is a sign that AMD is getting a shelf presence. That is it. 5 years ago, you couldn't find a computer with AMD inside it without doing some serious looking. Now you can find 4 out of 9 on walmarts computer page. I personally build only with AMD for now, but I have no issue with Intel processors (other than the loss of my left arm to pay for it). It is a good sign that AMD is becoming mainstream to the public, not just the enthusiast.
It should only be a couple of years more before Dell ships an AMD system. HP, shuttle, alienware, velocity micro, and monarch already do. I dont know about Gateway 2000.
all in all, Good for AMD!
FYI, 1 Athlon XP, 1 Duron, 1 G4, 2 Xenon, and 1 P4M at home.
Stop signs are only Suggestions
Because they don't sell amd, and people buy the dell name, not the processor. Retail sales matter because retail sales account for the people who know what processor they want. Adding dells intel sales would throw off the numbers indicating where consumer demand lies. People who buy dell either don't know better, or are lazy IT personnel who don't mind wasting money.
I contributed to the market share by buying an AMD64 to put on a shuttle box, topped with Fedora 4 as the OS.
My experience with that? I will never go back to expensive Intel chips. This system works just great.
I have personally done benchmarking of some compilers on AMD64s. I can't reveal the results but the bottomline, AMD's performance was far better than Intels. It Rocks!
I think it was a pain even at Microsoft to port their software to Intels Itanium. They have said that support for it will be limited in Longhorn. Regarding Media Center, I think Dave first ported to AMD64 and Acer was marketing the combination.
Their are some serious issues with Intel and not many liked it including Linus Trovalds and he blasted INTEL in one of his e-mails for not giving credit to AMD.(Dig through Kernel archive)
I like free market and competition. It was the WinTel lobby but these suckers somehow managed to escape from slashdoters, I am glad they are now losing.
I run the IT deparment at a not-for-profit clinc,
~40 users with xp (at $6 per license [techsoup.org])
1 Linux user (myself)
1 Win sever
4 Linux servers
all _AMD_ white boxes, except couple of intel laptops
except one hd once in a while, and a network card, nothing failed in three years so far,
I am always praised for money/features outcomes.
where is the remaining 2%?
Red Leader Standing By!
So, all of my AMD systems are still running fine, but both of the Intel boxes malfunctioned. robpoe is a schmuck.
http://www.amdzone.com/modules.php?op=modload&name =News&file=article&sid=4015&mode=thread&order=0&th old=0
the press release.
ignorance is bliss. googlefiberatx.com
www.moveamd.com -
AMD to build on sacred land.
AMD's proposed move to the Barton Springs watershed is a threat to the health of Barton Springs and the Edwards Aquifer, and therefore a threat to the long-term health of Austin.
Here's how AMD's proposed move threatens Barton Springs:
Create pollution in Barton Creek, Sycamore Creek, Williamson Creek, and Barton Springs from construction and post-construction runoff
Encourage employees to buy homes in the Barton Springs watershed, thereby boosting sprawl in exactly the wrong area
Encourage other companies and residential and retail developments to follow AMD into the Barton Springs watershed
Increase pressure to spend hundreds of millions more taxpayer dollars expanding roads in the Barton Springs watershed (when we could buy out potential development lands for conservation for a fraction of the cost if AMD and others would honor community plans)
Reverse over 25 years of community policy against locating major employers in the Barton Springs watershed
I've been an AMD loyalist for years, but now I'm totally questioning who they are. I hope more information on this endeavor can be found.
(\_/)
(O.o) This is Bunny. (> <)
More and more people buy PC's direct, rather than retail. Temporary solution: when you're tallying sales numbers, just pretend Dell doesn't exist!
In any case, notebook sales have topped desktops. AMD really dropped the ball on that one -- they have absolutely nothing which remotely compares to the Pentium M, and even Steve Jobs was forced to admit it.
Oh well, if AMD suffers due to its poor business decisions, they can always cry to the government about Intel the Big Bad Monopoly. Lord knows they shouldn't have to lose any money just because of lousy management.
AMD beats Intel handily there. This bodes ill for AMD, since the US market always rejects the superior product in favor of the ubiquitous, generic, default one. Maybe AMD should downgrade their processors and market them as McJunk to capture a commanding lead.
I have had various AMD systems run well when build with customizable components with the VIA chipsets and the NFORCE boards are rock solid because of the way they handle resources.
But I guarantee Joe Blow Workstation builder "Home of the $299 cracker box" isn't using these reliable components.
AMD would go miles further by enforcing the chipsets that are available to use their processors in, and managing the quality.
I think that is what he's referring to. Would I buy a Compaq AMD64 system? NO. Would I buy an HP AMD64 system? Absolutely. Because it costs 100-200 dollars more and they use the Nforce boards and not the crap assed SiS chipsets.
If you walk into Circus City and buy the $499 laptop from Compaq, you deserve to get burned.
Can you make an AMD run like a champ, Conclusion: Sure, but watch the boards you buy.
That is not the way the system works. They develop a process and hope a percentage of the chips manufactured meet the criteria to be a high end chip, the remainder are sold then at the lower end of the scale. The process variation creates the difference between a high end chip and a low end chip, not the product started at the beginning of the line. This is the reason AMD is developing a new fab. The better the fab, the greater number of high end chips are produced from the same process. If it was as simple as simply putting more high end parts into the production line then there would be no low-end line.
Eloquent words can mask much mischief. Judge Mayer
Personally I don't care what AMD or Intel's exact market shares are, I do however take this as a sign that the market is in a very good place. We have two companies in relatively comparable strong positions and several smaller companies filling out the niche markets (Via, Transmeta ...) and they all run the same code. It's also finally gotten to the point where the market dictates the course of the standard instead of just one company (Intel borrowing the x64 extentions from AMD). The companies are proffitable and the customer has choice. I can only wish the OS market looked like this.
Don't mess with the bunny, outsideworld.org
Having had good experiences to date, all our mobile workers who need number crunching power (which is in fact all of them...) are now getting AMD64 laptops using Turion processors. The bang for buck is very good, the battery life and heat buildup are also good. Mind you, for the moment we will buy Pentium D for developer workstations, because the cache is bigger than it is for the Athlon dual core units. It's a tradeoff based on the kind of work you are doing.
Panurge has posted for the last time. Thanks for the positive moderations.
the number of AMD chips coming out of AMD factories is 100%, while Intel is 0%.
so AMD must be better.
what? I compared apples to apples....
These numbers are poor. When you support numbers just becasue they support what you like, then you look like a mindless idiot.
Also, when comparing Apples to Apples, Intel won. Note the use of capitalization.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
Uhg. Someone presents what may be an interesting *view* into a pool of data and everyone else jumps on them about how that's not the only view into the data.
Well duh.
I'm a big AMD fan and my last 3 desktops have used AMD chips, but I smell bovine excrement in those stats.
omg, you are dumb dumb dumb
So dumb that havent posted as anonymous, and now will have to listen everyone telling intel copied the 64 instructions and bla bla bla...
So dumb you make my head hurt by reading it...
you dumb
gosh
No, that's not correct. The Opteron, Athlon, Sempron etc. are completely different chip designs. It's not like the fastest chips are sold as Opterons, and the slowest are sold as Sempron. The designs and the processes for manufacturing those designs are significantly different. I was referring to high-end designs (Opteron) vs. low-end designs (Sempron), not fast vs. slow clock speed (which is determined by process variation).
I'd like to get a new AMD-based machine. The problem is this: I want to get it from an outfit that gives me the same kind of warranty, selection, and competitive pricing I would get from Dell. I basically want to buy an AMD from Dell, but since they only sell Intel machines, I want to buy from the closest thing to Dell out there. Most of the AMD-based machines I'm seeing from large companies are lower end machines. I'm looking for a relatively high end machine (but not ultra-high end gaming). I don't want to buy from some small computer dealer or custom builder if I can avoid it since I want a real warranty and tech support I can call.
Also, I'm in Canada.
Can anyone offer advice? Share experiences?
Let's look at processor model numbers:
Athlon64 3200+
Pentium 4 540
Eureka! Clearly consumers are drawn to the processor that uses the bigger number!
It is official; digicraft.com now confirms it: Intel is dying.
OK, I couldn't help it.
Congratulations to AMD.
Today, AMD opened Fab 36. It is a 300mm Fab that will top out at twice the capacity of their current 200mm Fab 30. It will ramp over the next two years. That means they'll be able to serve half of the market. Up from 18% or so, now. In addition, they have arrangements for outsourcing production to Chartered Semi, if there is even more demand to cope with.
Add to that superior CPU products in the desktop, mobile, and server space as well as OEM's that seem to have lost their fear of Intel retalition, and what we have here is a revolution that will unseat Intel from its monopoly position.
Those numbers are most compelling in questioning Dell's exclusive vendor deal with Intel. If I were a Dell shareholder, I'd be complaining that I was in an Intel straitjacket, while the free market wriggles into whichever economics best suit it.
--
make install -not war
Because in the end all this means is that everyone is fighting for the same meltdown dead end chip architecture space.
My next box will have bucket of Opterons in it. They are the best bang for the buck. 4 dual-cores should do nicely (my word processor will have no problem keeping up with me). Oh, and my Blender exports to Povray (raytraced animation) should notice a speedup too...
Desktops !?!?
I bet 90% of the back-to-school buyers are purchasing laptops, seriously. If you add laptop sales to this equation AMD will likely go back to 10% share.
Dell didn't use AMD chips even when they had pin-compatible versions.
i see them at sams club. congrads to AMD
So does that mean we have to start rooting for Intel now?
Without Intel, AMD would not exist. AMD is a de facto rogue division of Intel. And it's destroying value in the market, not creating it.