Slashdot Mirror


Dell to Use AMD Chips in its Servers

garfangle writes "Dell has decided to include AMD's Opteron processor in its product line of servers. This is the first time Dell has used AMD chips within its own Dell branded products (excluding the recently acquired Alienware computers)." From the News.com article: "The deal appears to be confined to servers at this point. The news came along with the release of Dell's earnings results, which were in line with the disappointing warning the company provided last week. Revenue was $14.2 billion, up 6 percent from last year, but net income slid 18 percent to $762 million. Several times during the last few years, Dell CEO Kevin Rollins has hinted that the company was right around the corner from introducing products based on AMD's chips."

49 of 227 comments (clear)

  1. Yes, but when... by Overzeetop · · Score: 3, Insightful

    ...will this get to the workstations! That's where I need my horsepower.

    --
    Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
  2. Now all they need is a server operating system. by zymano · · Score: 4, Funny

    http://www.reactos.org/

    Somebody company will eventually try it.

  3. Devil? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    I wonder if Satan is wearing a hat with earflaps?

    1. Re:Devil? by Shadow+Wrought · · Score: 4, Funny
      I wonder if Satan is wearing a hat with earflaps?

      No, but he did just lose a snowball fight to Hitler...

      --
      If brevity is the soul of wit, then how does one explain Twitter?
    2. Re:Devil? by 42Penguins · · Score: 5, Funny

      Congratulations, you are the first to invoke Godwin's Law in a discussion about server CPUs.

    3. Re:Devil? by Shadow+Wrought · · Score: 2, Funny
      Congratulations, you are the first to invoke Godwin's Law in a discussion about server CPUs.

      Well of course by Law God would win, but he wasn't in the snowball fight, now was he?

      --
      If brevity is the soul of wit, then how does one explain Twitter?
    4. Re:Devil? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

      Saying "Hitler" in a discussion doesn't mean Godwin's Law is invoked.

      Only a Nazi would think that.

  4. Re:Intel wall starting to crumble by sdnoob · · Score: 2, Interesting

    just imagine the impact in the market if dell just up and switched *everything* over to amd chips exclusively (providing of course, amd could deliver the quantity needed).

  5. It's about time.. by HTMLSpinnr · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Dell's finally seen the light. Given Dell's (past) market share in the server market, this is definately a big win for AMD. Let's hope it's not too late in the game, though.

    One has to wonder, however, will there be any financial reprocussions from Intel after the announcement of this deal? If so, would it only push Dell further into AMD's lap?

    --
    $ man woman *
    -bash: /usr/bin/man: Argument list too long
    1. Re:It's about time.. by Araxen · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Intel can't really say much. Intel can't afford to lose Dell. They just sell too many computers and they wouldn't never do anything for Dell to totally switch over to AMD. AMD would capture a ton of marketshare if Dell totally dropped Intel.

  6. Re:Intel wall starting to crumble by Vancorps · · Score: 5, Insightful
    I don't imagine AMD will have as big a problem as many seem to think. They have plenty of FABs that can be used to make Opterons whether they are AMD owned or owned by the likes of IBM and countless others. I imagine timing is based on AMD dealings finally being able to guarantee delivery of a certain quantity threshold Dell set for them. It's a good sign considering the inherent lack of high end products from Intel these days.

    Of course Intel is coming back with some impressive new technology so the battle ahead looks good for us!

  7. For the really Lazy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Dell blah blah blah AMD blah server blah.

  8. The apocolypse is nigh... by doormat · · Score: 5, Informative

    I really think the reason they're finally using AMD chips is that AMD will finally have the manufacturing capacity to supply Dell. Fab36 is delivering revenue now, and will ramp more as the year goes by. Between Fab36 and their relationship with Chartered Semi, they can supply Dell with the chips they need. And since its most likely they'll be 4S (8 core) servers, for ever server dell sells, they'll need 4 chips from AMD.

    --
    The Doormat

    If you're not outraged, then you're not paying attention.
    1. Re:The apocolypse is nigh... by tjw · · Score: 4, Interesting
      And since its most likely they'll be 4S (8 core) servers, for ever server dell sells, they'll need 4 chips from AMD.
      No doubt this is the reason for the switch. AMD is offering what is basically an 8-way SMP on boards and cpus that don't fall out of line with commodity parts. Hell, Supermicro even has a 4-cpu (8 core) opteron board designed for 1U. Intel's solutions for anything more that 2-way smp still require special, uber-expensive Xeon MP cpus last time I checked and good luck cramming one into 2U or 1U.
      --

      XJS*C4JDBQADN1.NSBN3*2IDNEN*GTUBE-STANDARD-ANTI-UB E-TEST-EMAIL*C.34X
    2. Re:The apocolypse is nigh... by Jeff+DeMaagd · · Score: 3, Informative

      You have that wrong. In order to go more than two-way (two socket) AMD systems, you need to buy Opteron 8xx chips. Those are very expensive, almost as much as Xeon MPs in many cases. The first digit of Opteron numbers note the number of chips that can cooperate at once, 1xx is one socket, 2xx is two socket and 8xx for up to eight.

  9. Re:Intel wall starting to crumble by rachit · · Score: 4, Informative

    They are initiating outsourcing of some production to Chartred.

    I assume they planned in advance for this, since if the Dell deal didn't go through, they could cancel the Cartred deal without having tons of spare capacity on thier hands.

    With 20/20 hindsight, looking at AMD's Chartred plans, it should have been pretty obvious that AMD had a big customer lined up. Too bad I didn't have that foresight, otherwise I could have made some good cash on AMD stock.

  10. Is it the first time ? by lazy_arabica · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Am I wrong, or is it not the first time that Dell announces such a move ?

    1. Re:Is it the first time ? by drinkypoo · · Score: 2, Informative

      Yes, you are wrong. Dell previously announced they were considering using AMD processors, which is widely assumed to have been a tactic in their negotiations with intel at the time.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  11. Great timing by griffinme · · Score: 5, Funny

    Satan needs his parka! Apple goes to Intel Dell goes AMD Next thing you know Vista will ship. Someone else mentioned Intel trying to strongarm Dell over this. I highly doubt it since Intel is currently in court over this kind of practice right now.

    --
    Is he strong? Listen bud, He's got radioactive blood.
  12. Simple solution: by karnal · · Score: 5, Funny

    Buy some earplugs and mount the server under your desk. Kills 2 birds with one stone... or 2 stones...

    --
    Karnal
    1. Re:Simple solution: by drinkypoo · · Score: 3, Interesting

      It's possible to get noisy boxes from vendors who build them from commodity parts, too. Some guys from a Scala vendor (we bought infochannel from 'em) brought in a couple of 4U systems that were meant to be designer workstations, where you create content. One of them, the one in my office, has to be on all the time because part of our service contract states that we have to use their hardware, which of course is just commodity stuff, and the network manager software is on my system.

      Now of course this is braindead anyway, because the network manager component uses very standard protocols and needs only bandwidth and some disk space, it needs practically no CPU. I have an old Network Engines RoadsterLX box with a Celery 466 that could do the job more than adequately... not that I'm suggesting we use it, but we could get a cheapier dell 1U box and throw that into the mix.

      Instead, what we got was some cheap-ass commodity hardware in a 4U rack case that, I shit you not, is at least as loud as the Sun 4/260 that I used to sit at. For those who don't know, that's a 12-slot VME deskside case, about the size of six extra-large pizza boxes stacked on top of one another, then turned sideways. (Note that I'm talking about actual pizza boxes, not Sun "pizza boxes".) That machine's power supply was about the size of one of those little HP Brio celeron-based POS PCs, or an SGI Indigo.

      So an ordinary Pentium IV, an nVidia card of some sort (PCI-E), three hard drives, and a DVD-ROM, and it's got damn near enough fans to lift off and fly away... WTF?

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  13. As a former datacenter manager by linzeal · · Score: 5, Informative

    When we compared the power draw for opterons versus itaniums at the time when such a battle was being contested, the results were pretty bleak for Intel and anyone associated with them. We setup a subsidary company to build custom servers for our project and we saved pry 20,000 dollars in electricity costs over the life of the project. 3 years and 2000 servers. Why is Intel so stupid when it comes to power consumption for server processors? The air conditioning is what gets you when you have 2000 200-300 watt proccessors that is a helluva lot of energy to cool.

    1. Re:As a former datacenter manager by drinkypoo · · Score: 2, Informative

      Intel is getting better WRT power consumption, due to competition from AMD. Depending on who you talk to, Core Duo power consumption is either slightly lower or slightly higher than the dual-core Opteron power consumption (I would name it, if I could remember how AMD's stupid naming scheme worked.)

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    2. Re:As a former datacenter manager by drinkypoo · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Itanic had far and away the best fp scores when it came out. If what you had to do was almost all fp math then the itanium made sense at the time, possibly even from a flops-per-watt standpoint. Today it's just a footnote to a sad joke.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    3. Re:As a former datacenter manager by hackstraw · · Score: 3, Informative

      Itanic had far and away the best fp scores when it came out. If what you had to do was almost all fp math then the itanium made sense at the time, possibly even from a flops-per-watt standpoint. Today it's just a footnote to a sad joke.

      Yeah, use Itanic and bust on an Intel chip and get modded up around here, but Itaniums are good chips, and they have a market, but a fairly small one right now. They have up to 1.3GHz models that use less power than a Xeon. They use 62 Watts of power. Current Opterons use anywhere from 62 Watts to 110 Watts.

      No, odds are you can't justify one in your home, but for high performance floating point apps that need high memory bandwidth, Itaniums are still pretty much #1.

      Intel has been pretty aggressive in their power/flop ratio here lately and they are making excellent progress. Even crap chips from Intel such as the i860 turned into the Xscale processors.

      I've been using Itaniums from two different vendors for almost 4 years now, and I have no regrets. Opterons are damn good chips. The HTX spec is excellent. But its difficult to say which one is better at this time. I believe that the compilers are better for Itaniums than Opterons, but I haven't looked very deep into the good compilers for Opterons and have run no benchmarks yet. Its a tough call, and the competition is great.

    4. Re:As a former datacenter manager by Wdomburg · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Yeah, use Itanic and bust on an Intel chip and get modded up around here, but Itaniums are good chips, and they have a market, but a fairly small one right now. They have up to 1.3GHz models that use less power than a Xeon. They use 62 Watts of power. Current Opterons use anywhere from 62 Watts to 110 Watts.

      You should probably call up Intel and tell them to fix their spec sheets, because they seem to think that they're selling Itaniums clocked from 900MHz to 1.66GHz and draw anywhere from 90-122W.

      AMD, on the other hand, has dual core Opterons clocked at 2.2GHz and drawing only 55W.

    5. Re:As a former datacenter manager by Wdomburg · · Score: 3, Informative

      Interesting, their datasheet seems to be out of date. They don't mention the low power part.

      On the other hand, you're still looking at 62W for a single core part compared to 55W for a dual core. And looking a little further, it looks like AMD has added a new "EE" (energy efficient) line which run at 1.4GHz and draw only 30W.

      And the memory bandwidth numbers aren't particularly interesting. They're advertising 10.6GB/s on desktop Pentium 4 boards as well (see the I975X chipset, for example), and the AMD AM2 socket chips coming out this month will have a 12.8GB/sec memory controller on-die.

      The memory bandwidth provided by AMD solutions also scales with the number of processors, since you're adding an additional memory controller per processor. There are boards on the market now - like the Tyan Thunder K8QW - which boast 51.2GB/s aggregate memory bandwidth.

      And the reason for different models is because, unlike Intel processors which plug into a shared bus, Opterons are have dedicated Hypertraport links between the processors. There's three lines - 1xx which has a single link and is designed for uniprocessor configurations, 2xx which has two links and is designed for dual processor configurations, and 8xx which has three links and supports four and eight processor configurations. On current parts, the individual links at 8GB/sec, which means 8xx parts have 24GB/sec in aggregate bandwidth.

      That's going to change some next year, though, when they move to Hypertransport 3 (current chips use 1), which scale to a whopping 41.6GB/sec per link.

  14. Dell is Doomed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    This means Dell is doomed!

    Or was it Apple? Yes! This means Apple is Doomed!

  15. Ken Rollins On Bloomberg by HiyaPower · · Score: 2, Informative

    Ken Rollins gave a interview on Bloomberg. He equivocated all over the place about using AMD in anything but its high end servers. When pressed on it, he refused to be pinned down. "All we are talking about today" is the phrase. He continued to pump for the Intel chips. "We are very excited about Intel one and two socket" offerings. "All we are really announcing today" is about all they got out of him.

    1. Re:Ken Rollins On Bloomberg by LurkerXXX · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Probably because they are only going to try to sell a very few AMD servers, and all for PR. I'd lay money that it's from a backroom deal with Intel.

      Last year Dell started selling AMD CPUs. Boxed CPUs. Dell didn't make *ANY* computers those CPU's would fit in, but they offered the CPUs for sale. Why? It's incredably stupid to sell one upgrade component, that will only fit in your competitors machines, but not in your own, isn't it? So why? The only reason I can think of, is so that when Intel goes into court, and AMD tells the judge that Intel is using monopoly leverage on Dell so that Dell only uses Intel CPUs, Intel can say, 'well, Dell actually sells AMD CPU's as well'.

      I can't imagine any other reason for doing that. But a judge will probably see through that quickly, so now we get a new announcement from Dell that they will build *some* AMD based servers. How many? Not many. Only at least 4-way servers. Why only 4-way servers when we the customers have been clamering for AMD for years? Because they can say they use AMD as well, without really touching Intel's market share. This one is all to make Intel look like less of a monopoly to the courts folks. Don't get your hopes up for AMD based Dell medium/small servers or desktops. It ain't gonna happen.

  16. Circle by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    Wait a sec..
    Apple switches from PowerPC to Intel
    Dell switches from Intel to AMD

    Now all that's needed is for slashdotters to switch from AMD to PowerPC and the circle is closed!

  17. AMD Comment by HiyaPower · · Score: 4, Informative

    AMD Issues Statement on Dell Decision to Offer Customers a
    2006-05-18 16:36 (New York)

    Choice

    SUNNYVALE, Calif.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--May 18, 2006
    AMD (NYSE:AMD) released the following statement today
    regarding the announcement Dell Inc. made in its quarterly earnings
    statement that it intends to offer AMD Opteron(TM) Dual Core
    processor-based servers.
          "We welcome Dell, and Dell customers, to the world of AMD64," said
    Marty Seyer, AMD senior vice president, Commercial Business. "Dell is
    a customer-focused company and we're pleased to see that they are
    listening to their customers and providing them the choice of
    innovative AMD products. We look forward to working closely with Dell
    and bringing the benefits of AMD's leading performance-per-watt
    solutions to Dell's customers.

  18. First reaction was.... by ngdbsdmn · · Score: 2, Interesting

    ... to check if this is not another "Microsoft buys Linux" article but since today is not April 1st I guess I just don't give a crap. BTW Dell is very close to anonymous in Romania where IBM, HP, Fujitsu & DIY servers rule almost 100% of the market.

  19. Perfect game servers... by 9mm+Censor · · Score: 2, Funny

    to host Duke Nukem Forever DM severs!

  20. AMD has sit on its laurels by the_olo · · Score: 3, Informative

    You can test it by yourself:

    1) Go to http://www.amd.com/
    2) Search for "Pacifica" (their upcoming enterprise technology for virtualization)
    3) Click on the first link that their search engine returns ("AMD's Virtualization Solutions - Optimizing Enterprise Services")

    You get a HTTP 404 error. It has been like this for two months now! What an embarrasment for their marketing dept...

    And there's no mention of the estimated launch date of Pacifica processors anywhere on their site (or it's simply too hard to find). People are trying to make spending plans here and one can't get reliable information from AMD about one of its most important enterprise technologies planned for release this year!

    They just look amateurish. Sad to say that, since they still have technological advantage over Intel and taking care of good marketing would seem to be a matter of some very simple steps.

    1. Re:AMD has sit on its laurels by Tarqwak · · Score: 2, Informative

      Just go to AMD's Enterprise site root and you can guess correct link to Pacifica - AMD's Virtualization Solutions - which is linked from AMD's Business Solutions page.

      Their webmastering team needs a spanking though.

  21. Why was this modded offtopic? by thealsir · · Score: 2, Informative

    AMD's share price went up 15% AH in response to the news of Dell using their chips in their servers. How this is not connected to the topic, I do not know.

    --
    Do not downmod posts "overrated" simply because you disagree with them.
  22. So now we can order Dell AMD Linux servers by WillAffleckUW · · Score: 3, Funny

    and use them to crack the Human-Chimp Hybrid Genome from bone marrow from our monkey-loving human ancestors six million years ago!

    Say, that chimp's looking awful nice there ... woah, mind back to my work ...

    --
    -- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
  23. Somewhere in Wall Street by this+great+guy · · Score: 2, Funny

    Somewhere in Wall Street: "BUY AMD ! BUY AMD !"

  24. AMD targets 50% of 4P market share in 2006 by this+great+guy · · Score: 2, Informative

    For your information, /. readers, AMD predicted a few months ago (google "amd 4p server share") that they target 50% of the 4-way server market share at some point in 2006. So if Dell had decided to stick with Intel it would have meant that they would have restricted themselves to less than 50% of this market. Dell have really been stupid to wait so long to sell AMD servers, they have already lost a lot of money because of this (current headline on marketwatch.com in bold font: "Dell profit falls 18%").

    1. Re:AMD targets 50% of 4P market share in 2006 by this+great+guy · · Score: 2, Informative

      If you had googled "amd 4p server share" as I indicated in my post, you would have found that AMD already has 40% of that market share !

  25. Re:Yay!! by croddy · · Score: 3, Funny
    I'll believe it when I see it.

    Fool me once, shame on me. Fool me twice, shame on me again. Fool me a third time with an Alienware merger... yeah, shame on me. Meet the new box, same as the old box. Won't get fooled again.

  26. Re:Wohoo by diegocgteleline.es · · Score: 2, Informative

    If you keep track of the current offerings by Intel and AMD, you'll find that AMD chips are consistenly increasing their power consumption. Analyst mention "Presscot tendency" when they talk about this. Everybbody agrees it has to end - Intel is releasing a power-efficient arquitecture in a few months and while current AMD offerings are good, it just can't sit hpoing that intel isn't going to catch up, and it looks like the Core is that "catchup".

    AMD has just released recently a low-power Athlon line - but it looks more like a patch than a semi-rearchitecture like the core is. This new low-power line will help AMD somewhat and the 65nm switch in december will help a bit too but they'll have to work hard if they don't want to became the "hell" in the humoristic comentaries in a few months.

  27. Re:Reuters got it wrong by DamienNightbane · · Score: 3, Funny

    "I guess that means that Apple is not a "major PC maker" ?"

    You just now figured that out?

  28. Much ado about nothing by ygslash · · Score: 2, Insightful

    According to CNET, this is all just empty hype. Dell is only using AMD for "four-way servers", of which they sell only a few per quarter, and for recently-purchased Alienware. For everything else, they are sticking with straight Intel.

  29. Limited use yes, but in Dell's highest end product by WoTG · · Score: 2, Insightful

    There's a lot of chatter in this thread about this being little more than a PR stunt with limited sales value to AMD. At face value, this is true; however, consider the bigger picture. This news validates AMD's product -- Dell saying that a product is good is much better for AMD than Dell saying that "there's no demand" as was the case not that long ago. Remember, Dell is using this for their most expensive servers -- that's nothing to sneeze at. Heck, the profit for AMD for 4x800 series Opterons is the probably close to the profit that Intel gets from 100 Celerons. AMD probably has a gross margin of close to $1000 on those 800 series Opterons, versus maybe $20-50 for the Celerons.

    Dell's not announcing anything lower than the four cpu servers, but given the situation, Dell has no choice but to take baby steps. We're talking about huge volumes of chips in Dell's mainstream lines, so a little caution is reasonable! Nevertheless, now that Dell uses AMD chips, the next guessing game becomes "How long until their customers force Dell to get AMD 2-way servers (or maybe 64bit laptops)?". I'm thinking less than a year. They've already taken the hardest step of ditching the exclusivity with Intel. There's no real reason to hold back now.

  30. Re:Wohoo by Emetophobe · · Score: 3, Informative

    My amd chip runs pretty cool anyway. I recently bought an Athlon64 X2 3800+ (2ghz dual core). It actually runs cooler than my nforce4 chipset under load (while playing games like oblivion). Of course I did replace the stock heatsink/fan with an Arctic Cooling Freezer 64 Pro which has improved my cpu temperatures (paid $35 Canadian for the aftermarket cooler, and it's working amazing so far).

    I'm running at stock speeds and voltages. Here are my temp readings while idle and after playing oblivion for 2 hours:

    Idle: CPU: 30-33C Chipset: ~33C GPU: ~40C
    Oblivion: CPU: 37-38C Chipset: 41-42C GPU: 50-56C

    Of course, if I ran an instance of Prime95 torture test on each core, I would see cpu temperatures above 40C. But for what I use this computer for (gaming primarly), I never see the cpu go over 38C, which is pretty damn cool IMO (my old Dell P4 2.66ghz idles at 40C, higher than my load temps).

  31. What this means for AMD by Prien715 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Back in '99, AMD chips were found on laptops and whatnot, but they never really took off. They marketed their chips as a "value-priced" alternative to Intel (bullet train commercials mentioned "As fast as intel but cheaper"). Fast forward to today, where AMD abandoned their value brand (Duron, which they recently replaced with Sempron) and invented a new brand for their flagship chip (Opteron). AMD has gone from trying to compete in the Kia/Hyundai marketplace to competing in the Toyota/Lexus one -- rather than price being their selling point, they're focusing on quality (which, to be fair, they've had for quite a while. Again, this is just marketing.)

    People bemoan the lack of AMD in the server/laptop Dell space but consider what this looks like to anyone buying from Dell: "You can either buy these cheap but 'good enough' Intel servers, or you can upgrade and buy this premium AMD box". In the end, people prefer switching to a "higher quality" brand rather than a "price aware" brand: isn't it hard to defend taking anyone to McDonald's when there's a much better but slightly more expensive restaurant next door?

    --
    -- Political fascism requires a Fuhrer.
  32. Re:The apocalypse is nigh... by prisoner-of-enigma · · Score: 2, Informative

    While you're correct that greater-than-two-socket mobos require 8xx Opterons instead of 2xx ones, you're not quite correct with regards to pricing. The price differential for an Opteron 8xx versus a Xeon MP is rather substantial. For example, an Opteron 880 2.4GHz dual core chip is listed on pricewatch for $1,349. A Xeon MP 3.66GHz w/ 1MB of L2 goes for $1,799.00 -- and that's for a single-core part. Doing some quick math, we find that a four-socket setup of 880 Opterons (eight cores total) would cost you $5,396. You could get four Xeon MP's for $7,196, but that would yield you only four cores and much, much lower performance. You could go with an eight-way Xeon MP setup if you can find one, but that would cost $14,392, not to mention the amazing cost and scarcity of eight-way mobos. That's a $9,000 price premium for Intel.

    Switching to dual-core Xeon MP's helps a bit, but not a lot. A dual-core 3GHz Xeon MP (2x 2MB L2 cache) sets you back $3,501 per chip. Getting four of them brings the tab to $14,004. So you save about $400 over getting eight single-core Xeon MP's, and you'd probably save about $1,000-$2,000 on the motherboard. You're still more than double the cost of the Opteron 8xx setup, and no matter how you slice it, a 3GHz Xeon core on a 667MHz system bus has difficulty competing with a 2.4GHz Opteron core on a 1GHz HyperTransport bus.

    --
    In the end they will lay their freedom at our feet and say to us, Make us your slaves, but feed us. - Fyodor Dostoyevsky