Slashdot Mirror


IBM Opts for AMD

ExE122 writes "Since the unveiling of the low-cost, low-energy AMD Operton in 2003, Intel has been struggling in the server-grade processor insdustry. Now, IBM has announced their decision to use the AMD Opteron processor in their new line of BladeCenter servers. System x3455, x3655 and x3755 rack-mount servers, two-way Bladecenter LS21, and four-way LS41 blade servers sporting the new AMD processors have already been announced. IBM will continue this transition over the next three months.

From the article:
"IBM's choice is by all means an important victory over rival Intel, which is struggling to sell the remaining deposit of server processors before the general acceptance of Woodcrest X5100 chips. Unfortunately for Intel, at the end of the second quarter, Advanced Micro had 26 per cent of the market for servers built on personal computer chips, more than double its share a year earlier, according to Mercury Research."

Could this be lights out for Intel?"

69 of 195 comments (clear)

  1. Sun made the move in April by SIGALRM · · Score: 5, Informative
    Earlier this year, Sun announced new Galaxy servers based on the new 3.0GHz Opteron chips (called x56 chips). As part of this announcement, Sun announced 16 new benchmark records. Among the new records, (using Sun Studio Compilers btw):
    • New SPEC CPU 2000 FPrates for V40z, beating Dell PowerEdge 6850 based on Xeon on similar benchmark
    • New SPEC CPU 2000 FPrates for SunFire X4100, X4200 servers
    • Best SPEC CPU 2000 FP numbers on SunFire X2100 servers
    --
    Sigs cause cancer.
    1. Re:Sun made the move in April by b0r1s · · Score: 2, Interesting

      The real impact will come when IBM switches to AMD in their lower lines - the x306, x336, x346 - the ones that hosting companies and colo providers buy by the dozens.

      The power savings for 50-60 racks full of 1U servers could be significant.

      --
      Mooniacs for iOS and Android
    2. Re:Sun made the move in April by Wesley+Felter · · Score: 2, Informative

      The x3455 is basically an Opteron version of the x336.

    3. Re:Sun made the move in April by cerberusss · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Hmm strange... Check this out:
      Rack mounting rails in the Netherlands: EUR. 20,-
      Rack mounting rails in the USA: from $99 to $129

      That's a pretty bad difference. Caused by pure pricing strategy or am I overlooking something?

      --
      8 of 13 people found this answer helpful. Did you?
  2. Nice! by JanusFury · · Score: 5, Funny

    You'd think that with AMD sponsoring Slashdot, they could at least spell 'Opteron' right once or twice in stories...

    --
    using namespace slashdot;
    troll::post();
    1. Re:Nice! by pookemon · · Score: 4, Funny

      What! You haven't heard of the AMD Operton?

      Google it

      Sad that it seems to be a common mistake... (made 28,900 times apparently...)

      --
      dnuof eruc rof aixelsid
    2. Re:Nice! by pookemon · · Score: 3, Funny

      I got 18,900,000 - are you sure you didn't spell it wrong. :)

      --
      dnuof eruc rof aixelsid
  3. Flame war in the making? by Jtoxification · · Score: 3, Insightful

    You just opened the floodgates, Mister. But yes, I love AMD - look at my sig for the sake of /.

    Intel is going nowhere, however - there are far too many consumer-oriented PC corps out there that adore Intel. And sheesh, AMD has been on the short end for so long, it's hard to imagine that a corp like Intel couldn't wait it out, too.

    --
    --I gots 99 problems but a new machine ain't one!
    AMD! Asus! Whoot! 6 years!
    1. Re:Flame war in the making? by tanveer1979 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Its not about the processor, its the whole package, including the deal. For example even after wanting an AMD 64, I went for Intel Duo laptop because the kind of 30% deals which exist for Dell dont exist for other manufacturers! Once Dell comes out with AMD based laptops, Intel is going in for a real shocker.

      --
      My Aurora : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o91ZsGwJYyg
      FB : https://www.facebook.com/TanveersPhotography
  4. That's an easy one. by fuzz6y · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Could this be lights out for Intel?

    No. No it could not.

    --
    If you're going to be elitist, it would help to be elite.
    1. Re:That's an easy one. by davidsyes · · Score: 4, Funny

      But, it could be the dimmer switch, or the swimmer ditch for them...

      --
      Previously: "Linux... Toward the Sunrise..." Now: "Linux... Toward the-- No, now, part of Every Sunrise"
    2. Re:That's an easy one. by kingkade · · Score: 4, Informative

      Not if AMD's stock price in the recent 6 months is any indication. it's gone from around 42 to 17. AMD has accomplished a lot but Merom, Conroe and Woodcrest seem way too impressive to deny. Intel may finally strike back, especially considering AMD still needs to move to a 65nm process by the end of the year, no less. Please correct me if I'm mistaken.

    3. Re:That's an easy one. by Barny · · Score: 3, Informative

      Woodcrest (and conroe for that matter) are awsome single cpu solutions, the unified L2 cache and extended proccessing options allow them to bypass most speed problems of traditional code (cache coherancy thrashing, unoptomized code, etc) but all this gain is LOST when useing 2 CPUs (differant sockets) running in 64 bit mode, you will thrash the cache just like usual, the fancy microcode optimizer disables, it all falls apart.

      Intel have put a lot of nifty tricks into these new chips, tricks that will only work in single socket desktop systems. If amd add these soputions to their chips (unified cache running as part of memory controler for instance) they will gain not only in single CPU solutions but due to the mesh bus network (hypertransport), it would be able to deal with coherancy much better.

      --
      ...
      /me sighs
    4. Re:That's an easy one. by Comatose51 · · Score: 4, Informative

      Your post seems to imply that AMD's stock price went down because of the Conroe and that the market has decided that the Conroe will crush AMD. That's misleading. Intel has recently slashed prices quite dramatically and initiated a new price war with AMD. That's the real cause of the stock price drop as margins in both companies are go down. The effects of new technology on Wall Street's thinking takes a little while to sink in. They're not nearly as quick as Slashdot.

      --
      EvilCON - Made Famous by /.
    5. Re:That's an easy one. by kingkade · · Score: 2, Informative

      Your post seems to imply that AMD's stock price went down because of the Conroe

      I didn't imply anything or at least wasn't trying to. Ths stock price went down because of the repeated downgrading (first by UBS, if I believe). Since then even the Dell niche had little impact when it rose from around 30 up to 35 and then proceeded to tank toward 17. I agree that those downgrading is because of Intel dropping prices -- because they can afford to. or at least more than AMD can. Couple that with Conroe, and I really don't see what AMD can offer to compete. By the way I'm not against AMD b/c I'm an INTC holder b/c, it's the other way around. I dumped AMD after losing quite a bit :(. They do seem to be picking up some steam FWIW.

      The effects of new technology on Wall Street's thinking takes a little while to sink in. They're not nearly as quick as Slashdot.

      You're underestimating traders. They research their thousands (like me) to millions of dollars of investment in tech just like they do oil, etc. I bet you they know Otellini's bowel movements a factor that in. Compare that with some intel/amd fanboys drowning out most of the knowledgeable people on this site.

    6. Re:That's an easy one. by edmudama · · Score: 2, Informative

      Not all "blades" are single-socket implementations. Sun's flagship x86 blade is 4 sockets/8 cores using the Opteron 885, with up to 32GB of shared memory for those 4 sockets.

      It would make sense for blades to appear in all sorts of configurations, depending on what application is being targeted and the available budget.

      --
      More data, damnit!
    7. Re:That's an easy one. by Wesley+Felter · · Score: 4, Informative

      all this gain is LOST when useing 2 CPUs (differant sockets) running in 64 bit mode, you will thrash the cache just like usual, the fancy microcode optimizer disables, it all falls apart.

      Sorry, but there is no evidence for this. Real-world benchmarks show that 2-socket, 64-bit Woodcrest systems have good performance (usually better than Opteron).

    8. Re:That's an easy one. by fbg111 · · Score: 2, Funny

      I beg to differ. Absolutely, indubitably this is the end for Intel. Anyone who argues otherwise is clearly a fool, an Intel phanboi, or someone with a lot of Intel stock. The question is purely rhetorical, and not in any way intended to generate faux commentary or a flamewar.

      --
      Flying is easy, just throw yourself at the ground and miss. -Douglas Adams
    9. Re:That's an easy one. by styrotech · · Score: 3, Insightful

      One thing that seems apparent to me is how AMD comes out with better technology than Intel, and it takes literally many years of hard slog for AMD before the rest of the (non tech geek) world finally seems to grudgingly accept this.

      Then when Intel comes out with better technology after all those years, suddenly before the hardware is even released the whole world has seemingly swung back to Intel in the space of a few days.

      The marketing guys at AMD must be wondering just what it takes to overcome the massive gravity of Intels mindshare.

    10. Re:That's an easy one. by Zontar_Thing_From_Ve · · Score: 2, Informative

      Your post seems to imply that AMD's stock price went down because of the Conroe and that the market has decided that the Conroe will crush AMD. That's misleading. Intel has recently slashed prices quite dramatically and initiated a new price war with AMD. That's the real cause of the stock price drop as margins in both companies are go down. The effects of new technology on Wall Street's thinking takes a little while to sink in. They're not nearly as quick as Slashdot.

      Quite right. And please remember that the stock market also believed until a month or two ago that SCO was worth more than $4 a share and they STILL believe that it's worth over $2 a share. I don't think that I have to explain to anyone on Slashdot that the fact that this stock still has any value at all is a good indication that Wall Street really does not understand "this technology thingy" very well.

    11. Re:That's an easy one. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

      I'd like to see one of those benchmarks. Intel 64 bit mode was pig-slow on previous generation of Xeons and I haven't seen any benchmarks for Woodcrest running 64 bit code.

    12. Re:That's an easy one. by nessus42 · · Score: 2, Insightful
      You're underestimating traders.
      I think not. Wall Street has shown time and time again that they are generally sheep with absolutely no ability to predict the future.

      This criticism, however, applies just as much to the average Slashdot participant.

      |>oug
    13. Re:That's an easy one. by 2nd+Post! · · Score: 2, Interesting

      If AMD tried the "family" approach, with ads and marketing of how Athlons enabled heart warming success stories...

      A GI chatting with his girlfriend over VideoChat
      A mom making a DVD of her newborn addressed to her own mom
      A dad making a movie of his boy's baseball game

      Things like that. Right now by focusing on price, value, or performance they paint themselves as me-toos and knock-offs.

  5. Lights out for Intel? by Michael+Woodhams · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Intel are still ahead in market share, and have just released some very competitive chips.

    I'm an AMD supporter, but the near future is them trying to hold the ground they've recently taken, not expanding further.

    (And Intel probably the reserves to stuff up again, be uncompetitive for a few years, and still make a comeback with the next generation of chips.)

    --
    Quattuor res in hoc mundo sanctae sunt: libri, liberi, libertas et liberalitas.
  6. Odd.... by VikingThunder · · Score: 4, Interesting

    It's kind of odd how everybody is jumping on the AMD train when Intel is finally having viable products with their new architecture (For instance, Dell finally jumping on board).

    1. Re:Odd.... by 75th+Trombone · · Score: 2

      I believe he was talking about them recently jumping on the AMD train. His "For instance" jumped back to the beginning of his post.

      --
      The United States of America: We do what we must because we can.
  7. Put a fork Intel...not by slyborg · · Score: 5, Funny

    Paul Otellini : "AMD has 26% of the market? Well, screw that - if we can't have 75% of the market, we're outta here. Call up Slashdot, let 'em know we're closing the doors tomorrow."

  8. Lights out for PPC? by TerranFury · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Better question: Is this lights out for the Power line?

    IBM seems to be giving up on their Power cores. That's what concerns me, because it looked like they had a big shot of gaining territory in the gaming-and-entertainment market.

    1. Re:Lights out for PPC? by Kadin2048 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I don't think so, but I think IBM has realized that there is just a big market out there for x86-based server hardware, and if they don't provide it to the customer, somebody else (Dell/HPaq) will.

      My understanding is that their new generation of blade servers will let you mix and match Power and x86/Opteron blades on the same backplane, so that you can mix and match whatever you want, in order to fill your needs.

      Frankly, this might be a good thing for Power if it's true, since it might allow customers who aren't ready to jump to Power completely (as in, buy a system that's exclusively Power based) to get a system that's mixed. Or get a predominantly x86 based system, but pop in a few Power boards to see how they work and really compare them apples-to-apples under whatever their business workload is. If Power is as good as IBM says it is, that can't be anything but a good thing.

      IBM not offering an x86-based blade system would be just suicidal; they have a great brand name but it's not enough to keep people buying their RISC stuff if what they really want is x86.

      --
      "Ladies and gentlemen, my killbot features Lotus Notes and a machine gun. It is the finest available."
    2. Re:Lights out for PPC? by Ilgaz · · Score: 3, Insightful

      IBM offers x86 and Power5 based solutions for years. The PowerPC used in IBM servers and Workstations is very different from the ones Apple shipped in their desktop computers.

      Gaming territory is almost invaded by PowerPC RISC chips. Even XBox 360 uses sort of PowerPC and Cell processor in PS3 is also PowerPC.

      The chips used in servers are from same standard (PowerPC) and shares some stuff but completely different. We are speaking about some monsters here.

      Can check here for more info http://www-03.ibm.com/chips/power/index.html

      Those things shows my Quad G5 as a toy :)

      "Power" is sort of standard in fact, check http://www.power.org/ , it is very alive and well. In fact, it looks like taking over the World.

    3. Re:Lights out for PPC? by stevesliva · · Score: 4, Insightful
      IBM is most definitely not giving up on Power6 or Cell just because they're announcing Opteron blades. You have to remember this is IBM. They'll still sell you a System Z mainframe to run your COBOL code from 1972 on VM. Or you could run linux on it, if you'd like.


      The next Power processor will be the Power6, and is supposed to come out next year. It's still be dual core, but meant to run at 4-5GHz. They also continue with PowerPC products, even without Apple.

      --
      Who do you get to be an expert to tell you something's not obvious? The least insightful person you can find? -J Roberts
    4. Re:Lights out for PPC? by twiddlingbits · · Score: 2, Informative

      If the Power6 is 4-5GHz and they don't figure out a way to make it run cooler, then you'll need water cooling on the servers. That's not easy and not cheap. I've seen water cooling on racks (basically heat exchangers) but internal to a server is very different. Intel gave up on the high GHz due to HEAT and I don't recall the Power chips being much cooler than Intel chips. BTW, it's called the "Z-series" and it's all the IBM mainframes (except AS400s) from small to HUGE.

    5. Re:Lights out for PPC? by TheRaven64 · · Score: 2, Interesting
      Once upon a time, there were two architectures, POWER and PowerPC. These shared a large common subset of instructions, but each had a few not supported by the other. If you tried to run POWER software on PowerPC (or vice versa), each unsupported instruction could be trapped by the OS and emulated; AIX did this in some PowerPC-based workstations, for example. Most compilers, including gcc, can target the common subset, and produce code that will run on POWER of PowerPC.

      These days, IBM continues the POWER brand, but since the POWER3 (I think) these have been PowerPC chips. The difference between POWER and PowerPC these days is the target audience, not the instruction set (although some PowerPC chips do include a set of vector instructions not found in POWER).

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    6. Re:Lights out for PPC? by stevesliva · · Score: 2, Informative
      BTW, it's called the "Z-series" and it's all the IBM mainframes (except AS400s) from small to HUGE.
      You missed the re-branding, obviously.

      If you really want to debate semantics, I could point out that the AS/400 became the iSeries, which is of course now the System i, which runs on power5.

      --
      Who do you get to be an expert to tell you something's not obvious? The least insightful person you can find? -J Roberts
  9. "Could this be lights out for Intel?" by jbellis · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Let's see... 100 minus 26... carry the 9... that leaves 74% share left for Intel, right? I'm going to have to go with "No, doesn't look like lights out."

    Please, quit it with the retarded questions at the end of the article summaries.

    --
    Carnage Blender : Meet interesting people. Kill them.

    1. Re:"Could this be lights out for Intel?" by MadEE · · Score: 2, Informative
      Let's see... 100 minus 26... carry the 9... that leaves 74% share left for Intel, right?

      Nope, Intel has 72.9%.
    2. Re:"Could this be lights out for Intel?" by ozbird · · Score: 2, Funny

      Let's see... 100 minus 26... carry the 9...

      Carry the 9?! Oh, Pentium maths.

  10. Could this be lights out for intel? by RLiegh · · Score: 5, Funny

    Of course, as we all know, THIS the year that Linux takes over the desktop, and MS goes down the drain.

    Gee, I love living in Slashdot Land!

  11. Not too suprising by jjthe2 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    You know this switch was coming sooner or later. AMD already does a lot of their serious R&D at IBM. They'll be the same company within 5 years.

    1. Re:Not too suprising by stevesliva · · Score: 4, Interesting
      You know this switch was coming sooner or later. AMD already does a lot of their serious R&D at IBM.
      Sort of. They're definitely sharing the Silicon-on-Insulator and some Strained Silicon secret sauce for a few process nodes, and even settling on some process compatibility-- Chartered Semi is now a second source for both AMD processors and the IBM-designed XBox processor. I wouldn't belittle AMD's own R&D, though. They're doing good things at Dresden.


      However. Process codevelopment hardly predicts systems codevelopment-- Just ask Sony and Toshiba, who collaborate on silicon but are on opposite sides of the HDDVD vs BluRay battle.

      --
      Who do you get to be an expert to tell you something's not obvious? The least insightful person you can find? -J Roberts
  12. End of intel as likely as end of IBM by gethoht · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Core 2 Duo is posed to dominate the desktop market unless AMD comes back with a strong chip ASAP.
    It seems to me intel will gain back some lost market share with the Core 2 Duo.

    It's ridiculous to add the "end of intel" comment to the end of the article.

    --
    All things are subject to interpretation, whichever interpretation prevails at a given time is a function of power and n
    1. Re:End of intel as likely as end of IBM by Aadain2001 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Time to build a new fab, from the ground up, is around 4 years (and 4billion dollors). Last time I looked, AMD wasn't expanding very quickly or had the assets to build many fabs in parallel. Intel's current generation sucks, even Intel people will admit that. But the current direction is much more efficent and has great performance, so I definatly think we'll see Intel regain market share.

      --
      Space for rent, inquire within
    2. Re:End of intel as likely as end of IBM by rts008 · · Score: 4, Informative

      "But the current direction is much more efficent and has great performance, so I definatly think we'll see Intel regain market share."

      I agree 100% for the short-term, but I don't count AMD out of the picture. (short-term: Intel kicks butt, medium-term, AMD kicks butt, long term: lather, rinse, repeat)

      Note this: (http://www.eetimes.com/news/semi/showArticle.jhtm l;jsessionid=VCQM2KMTL4VXUQSNDBECKHSCJUMEKJVN?arti cleID=188700612)

      (quote from above link) "EE Times: With fab 38, AMD is planning to install a very modern production line. But this fab will launch production only in two years. What are AMDs plans for the time between?

      Udo Nothelfer: Presently, the main focus of Fab 36 is an aggressive ramp-up for 90-nm chips on 300 mm. Also we are about to complete the 65-nm technology qualification and will bring them to production in the second half of 2006.

      EE Times: Are the technological issues solved, especially regarding lithography and materials?

      Nothelfer: With the relevant problems, we are through. We are nicely on track and will reach our goal in the second half of the year. Our next major challenge will be the rapid ramp-up of 65-nm volume production. Our goal is quite aggressive: By mid-2007, we want to have the conversion to 65-nm in fab 36 done. "

      He (Nothelfer) then starts talking about the 45 nm hurdles they are working on.

      I'm sure Intel is also forging ahead (one hint: get rid of the wole FSB concept, HyperTransport works!), and it will take a long time (if ever) for AMD to break over the 50% market share, but AMD increasing it's market share by any significant amount has an effect on Intel.

      BTW, I happen to be partial to AMD cpu's, but I am not a rabid fanboy, I have both AMD cpu's(2), and Intel cpu's (3) on my home network.

      Core Duo is a big step up for Intel, and I expect them to take full advantage of this while they can, then AMD will step in with their volley.

      Who wins? So far, the customers. Hopefully that will continue, as I for one welcome my Star Trek computer-like overlords!

      --
      Down With Slashdot BETA!!! I've been around the corner and seen the oliphant; you can only abuse me from your perspecti
  13. lack of competition, not too much competition by Dr_Art · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I think TFA misses an important point. It's not whether Intel or AMD captures the entire market, or what market share these two players have. With only two major players, I'd say the main problem is that we have too little competition, not too much!

    Regards,
    Art

  14. Apple Curse? by Cadallin · · Score: 3, Funny

    Is this the Apple Curse coming to fruition? Any chip supplier Apple picks seems to constantly have problems. It happened with Motorola, it happened with IBM, now Intel for goodness sake! Let's just hope Intel doesn't start having major production issues out of the blue.

    1. Re:Apple Curse? by mochan_s · · Score: 2, Insightful

      That's because windows supports both AMD and Intel architechtures in windows. They may both be x86 but all the enchancements they've done for optimizations are really different - like multimedia instructions, pipelining stuff are probably all different. So there is probably a little bit more involved in supporting AMD CPUs.

    2. Re:Apple Curse? by thesandtiger · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I remember when Apple first chose Intel over AMD and people were screeching that they were stupid to do so because AMD chips at the time were far superior. Jobs had said something about seeing what Intel had coming up - and I have to say, for Apple's purposes and needs (fast chips, abundant supply) the Intel switch was the exact right idea. Had they gone with AMD, they'd have the lesser (at this point) of two options for their desktop/portables and possibly some supply concerns. I love AMD stuff, but they are not the production powerhouse that Intel is, and their current offerings for desktop/portables don't really touch the new Intel stuff.

      As for their lack of neutrality - they can't be neutral because of the differences between AMD and Intel optimizations etc. Yeah, they're both x86, but Apple likes to be able to know EXACTLY what they're shooting for, hardware-wise, and to integrate hardware and software as fully as possible to make their stuff "just work." I'm sure they *could* handle using either Intel or AMD stuff, but there would be more overhead, and I am sure that, due to the exclusivity, they're getting a little extra help from Intel when it comes to optimizing OSX & other applications.

      --
      Since I can't tell them apart, I treat all ACs as the same person.
  15. My thoughts exactly by Weaselmancer · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Except I was thinking that even if Intel chucked their whole x86 line, they still make a boatload of other chips. Like XScale, for instance. Their previous line of ARM processors (the SA-1100 family) are freaking *everywhere*.

    --
    Weaselmancer
    rediculous.
    1. Re:My thoughts exactly by l3prador · · Score: 2, Informative

      Aren't they selling off their XScale line to Marvell?

  16. Intel still has no answer to 4P and above Opteron by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    Even with their new Woodcrest CPU finally making it out of vapourware status, Intel has no real answer to Opteron in the 4P and above server space. Itanium is a failed venture that is on life support. It often performs worse than Opteron systems much much cheaper, so no hope there.

    Intel might regain a little marketshare in the 1P/2P server space with Woodcrest, but they're still in full retreat in the Enterprise market as more and more companies move to 4P+ servers.

    Seeing as AMD are releasing Socket F and Rev G chips soon, much of the performance advantage Woodcrest might have had will vanish quickly.

  17. AMD to hold and possibly take back ground in '07. by Black-Six · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I recently Googled "AMD Quad Core" and clicked on the first or second result and read the article. If this article holds true, AMD could very well blow Intel off the map and into orbit. The article said that the recent buyout of chip maker ATI is part of a grander strategy by AMD to take a bite out of Intel. The article said that the current CPU dye made by any manufactuer contains 18 individual components, minus the cores, to create the CPU dye. AMD's 4x4 quad core slated to launch in early '07 is being rebuilt from the ground up. AMD is going to attempt to modularize a CPU dye to allow for quicker, cheaper, and easier manufactuering. By that they mean that each individual component will be interchangeable and have an on dye socket to be plugged into. A good visual image of this is building blocks. Identically shaped and sized units rearranged to create a new structure. The article said that the only difference hardware wise between an Opteron and an 64 X2 is 3 components. If AMD is successful in modularizing the CPU dye, this article estimates that AMD will have "entry level" 4x4 CPU's in 8000-9000+ range avaliable to CONSUMERS for around $400-$600 and industry quality models at around $1000 on the low end. Only time will tell if this is true, but for me, I hope it comes true as I'm being asked at school by the teachers as to who will have the better CPU in the future and my answer is "AMD of course.".

  18. Uhh... this isn't new and it's FUD by saleenS281 · · Score: 4, Informative

    IBM already has bladecenters with opterons... why is this news? How is this a defeat for Intel? IBM is basically announcing a refresh of their current lineup... you can bet your ass they'll be doing the same thing when intel rolls out the new Xeon in full force as well.

    Remember kids, just because you like to pull for the underdog, doesn't mean it's OK to make false statements about the king.

  19. without HyperTransport, AMD would be dead by tetromino · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Intel dead? Have you people been living in a cave for the past few months?

    Look at some benchmarks. The new 5100 series Xeons with the Woodcrest core have been out since June, and a dual Woodcrests crush dual Opterons in almost every test. AMD's only hope at the moment is HyperTransport, with which they rule the market for 4-socket servers (Intel's old-fashioned FSB doesn't really scale to 4 sockets). But thanks to Core2 (Conroe and Woodcrest), Intel has taken over the 1-socket and 2-socket market. Prepare to see AMD's market share take a nosedive.

    I am generally an AMD fanboy, but my next system will use Intel chips. Now that Core2 is here, I am simply not interested in an antiquated AMD chip which can only complete an SSE2 operation once every two cycles. Until the K8L comes out, it's Intel Inside for me.

    1. Re:without HyperTransport, AMD would be dead by tetromino · · Score: 3, Informative

      Intel mitigates its lack of a modern bus by giving each 771 socket its own FSB to the northbridge (making the northbridge much more complicated as a side effect), upping the frequencey of that FSB to 1333 MHz, and implementing a very clever memory prefetch algorithm to hide resulting northbridge latency. Plus, of course, tons of cache to help limit the amount of data you need to send over the bus. As a result, a dual Woodcrest will still kick a dual Opteron's ass, although Woodcrest on HyperTransport would have been much faster. Of course, all these tricks don't really scale to more than 2 sockets, which is why Intel is pushing so hard for 4-core chips.

    2. Re:without HyperTransport, AMD would be dead by kscguru · · Score: 3, Insightful
      Crap benchmarks. Seriously, those reek to high heaven.
      • Comparing FB-DIMM to DDR. FB-DIMM has something like 4x the bandwidth, and isn't even available outside Intel OEM samples. AMD is moving to DDR2 real soon. Comparing pre-production Intel parts to half-year-old AMD parts isn't benchmarking. It's PR.
      • The benchmark list is mostly home-brewed. A hacked-together transaction processor (when there are industry standard ones out there for comparison - TPC numbers would be ideal), and RSA crypto optimized for the Intel processor.
      • Their SAMP benchmark and portgresSQL benchmark are worthless (they dropped to single-socket for them). The only common ones on the list are specInt and specFP - both single-processor benchmarks that don't show scalability.
      • The second link is a well-known example of Anand running a benchmark and discovering severe performance problems (i.e. mysql scales very poorly with more Opteron processors due to a mysql bug) - then still proclaiming Intel's huge victory.
      Woodcrest is faster in single processor configurations. Duh - it's a preproduction model compared to AMD's 3-year-old design. These benchmarks ultimately say NOTHING about multiprocessor configurations - I have yet to see any useful 2-socket benchmarks.
      --

      A witty [sig] proves nothing. --Voltaire

  20. Spin Away.. by thesupraman · · Score: 2, Informative

    Wow, AMD Really are spnning evrything they can get their hands on in the last few weeks - could it be that they are trying to divert attention away from something?
    Let me think.. what was AMDs last real news?? When is the next major milestone in their processor lineup?

    What goes around comes around.. Intel have been busy beavers for a while, relying on their rapidly aging netburst architecure, and hurting for it, while they got their next generation in order - perhaps AMD should have done a bit more work to have an answer ready... oh well.

    IBM of course will do anything to divert server attention away from Intel, due to the fact that they have their own large-systems architecture to support - Power, and Intels ia64 is a competitor, whereas AMD have nothing even close to that market - of course IBM want people to like AMD and avoid Intel...

    I think the correct technical term is 'Duh!'

  21. DOOM AND GLOOM by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Could this be lights out for Intel?

    Do the editors really think that adding stupid little phrases like this to every article enhance the experience? Why do we need to read this every time that something happens that gives an avatage to Intel or AMD? Sheesh, give us a break.

    Minnesota twins batters hit 2 home runs in yesterdays game. Could this spell apocalptic doom and drawn out painful deaths for the New York Yankees?

  22. I hope it's not the end for Intel by Rotten168 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    AMD needs competition just as Intel does. More competition = good.

  23. AMD manufacture costs by BigFootApe · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Everyone keeps talking about K8L. If they can deliver it in the short term (hah!), great, but what they really need is K8 Rev. G.

    A current AM2 K8 dual core with 512k+512k cache is similar in size to Conroe with a 15% (roughly) disadvantage in performance (at common price brackets). Moving to 65nm will drastically reduce die sizes, allowing AMD to squeeze more chips on each silicon wafer, even compared to Conroe.

    Consequently, AMD will be able to sell their chips to us at really cheap prices while still making a good profit, building a war-chest for when K8L faces off against CxQ. Then we repeat the whole process again when Intel moves to 45nm.

    I think having a 4m L2 cache might be a bit of a boat anchor around Intel's neck when it comes to manufacturing. Time will tell.

    1. Re:AMD manufacture costs by ndykman · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Actually, caches are easy to lay out on chip and manufacture. In fact, it's much harder to lay out complex logic. In fact, it is interesting to speculate on how having the HT controller on the die, compared to plain cache, could affect yields for AMD compared to Intel. Of course, speculation is all you can do, because there's no way you can get those numbers from either company.

      Of course, Intel will have the same challenge when CSI is supposed to be on line in the higher-end models in 2008. Also, it will be interesting to see how well the 65nm to 45nm transition goes for Intel.

      But, Intel has a real advantage in that it has a great new architecture to improve on. While there is lots of talk and wonder about the next new architecture from AMD, Intel doesn't have to wait for AMD to catch up.

      All in all, I think Intel will lose some ground on the high-end server space for this year and next, but I think Intel will maintain it's share in the lower-end space and may gain in the enthusiast market, as the new Core 2 models look extremely strong, and I don't think 4x4 will really impact that as much as AMD would like.

      One thing is for sure. We need Intel and AMD; we benefit from the competition. I remember how great it was to have a Dual Xeon workstation at work in 2002, and how expensive it was. Now, I can more power at home for much, much less.

  24. Could this be lights out for Intel? by fbg111 · · Score: 2, Funny

    Yes, of course. Absolutely, indubitably this is the end for Intel. Anyone who argues otherwise is clearly a fool, an Intel phanboi, or someone with a lot of Intel stock.

    --
    Flying is easy, just throw yourself at the ground and miss. -Douglas Adams
  25. Re:Operton vs Xeno by arose · · Score: 4, Funny

    You sir, are a xenophobe.

    --
    Analogies don't equal equalities, they are merely somewhat analogous.
  26. Whatever happened to the Cell? by Don_dumb · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I thought IBM were chucking the new Uber-chip the Cell into blades and this was going to revolutionise the world [/hype], did it not work? Or haven't they actually put these on sale yet?
    I would have though that this would at least muddy the waters a bit with the whole Intel vs AMD war on IBM servers.

    --
    If this were really happening, what would you think?
    1. Re:Whatever happened to the Cell? by GauteL · · Score: 2, Informative

      The Cell processor is an in-order execution chip with strong focus on floating point. For this reason it will probably be really good for scientific calculations and simulation, but not very practical for general server-applications.

      The Opteron servers and the Cell servers will most likely live side by side in the product offering from IBM. Apples and Oranges and all that...

    2. Re:Whatever happened to the Cell? by powerlord · · Score: 2, Funny
      Apples and Oranges and all that...


      Considering the article and discussion ... should that be "Apples and Windows and all that..."? :)
      --
      This space for rent. All reasonable inquiries will be entertained at proprietors discretion.
  27. could this be lights out for slashdot? by eshefer · · Score: 3, Insightful

    when a slashdot editor writes "could this be lights out for companyX" when companyY is a sponsering vendor.. I have a feeling you guys are heading twards shark-jumping waters fast.

    this is a design win for AMD, yes. and an important one at that. but this is a far cry from lights out for intel. jeezz.

  28. Intel's own tech docs by Visaris · · Score: 4, Informative

    Intel's own tech documents state that their famous "Micro-Ops Fusion" does not work in 64-bit mode. This feature is one of the main features that make the Core2 architecture as fast as it is. Losing this knocks performance down around 5 to 6 percent, which puts Opteron just that much closer.

    xbitlabs has some more details.

    No one is trying to say that Woodcrest isn't a good 64-bit chip. We are just telling it like it is: woodcrest does not gain much from 32 -> 64-bit code (in some cases it is a bit slower), while the Opteron gains decently almost across the board.

    --

    I am a viral sig. Please help me spread.
  29. IBM Negates their own advantage. by Glasswire · · Score: 2, Informative

    For 4-way MP, one of the reasons that IBM Xeons (like x366) have been excellent performers is the sophisticated memory controller hub chipset ("X architecture", the 'Hurricane' chipset) which has an advanced L4 cache and snoop filter integrated. What IBM now calls the x3850 (basically same as x366) still has this advantage - and combined with the new Intel 'Tulsa' Xeon MP chips with huge L3 caches, IBM should probably outperform their generic design x3655 Opteron (and other Opteron 4-way boxes). The real reason, I suspect, why IBM is doing this is not so much technical (they have felt their Xeon MPs were competative against Opteron 4-ways) but that there is now an AMD market mindshare which had created a disadvantage in some corporate accounts that had adopted the other AMD 4-ways (generally the HP 585) and were happy with it - IBM felt shutout wherever AMD fanboys became dominiant in IT thinking.

    In the 2-way DP space the new IBM x3650 with Xeon 5100 series Woodcrest (and any other Woodcrest based DP) will be as good or better than anything AMD throws at the DP space in 2006 -incl the new 2.8GHz F socket stuff.

  30. AMD Operton - Doesn't that run on Nucular energy ? by flyingace · · Score: 2, Funny

    AMD Operton - Doesn't that run on Nucular energy ?