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?"

Comments

Sun made the move in April

[SIGALRM]

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

Nice!

[JanusFury]

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

Re:Nice!

[pookemon]

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...)

That's an easy one.

[fuzz6y]

Could this be lights out for Intel?

No. No it could not.

Re:That's an easy one.

[davidsyes]

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

Re:That's an easy one.

[kingkade]

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.

Re:That's an easy one.

[Comatose51]

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.

Re:That's an easy one.

[Wesley Felter]

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).

Lights out for Intel?

[Michael Woodhams]

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.)

Odd....

[VikingThunder]

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).

Put a fork Intel...not

[slyborg]

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."

Lights out for PPC?

[TerranFury]

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.

Re:Lights out for PPC?

[stevesliva]

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.

"Could this be lights out for Intel?"

[jbellis]

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.

Could this be lights out for intel?

[RLiegh]

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!

End of intel as likely as end of IBM

[gethoht]

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.

Re:End of intel as likely as end of IBM

[rts008]

"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!

lack of competition, not too much competition

[Dr_Art]

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

Uhh... this isn't new and it's FUD

[saleenS281]

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.

Re:Not too suprising

[stevesliva]

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.

Re:Operton vs Xeno

[arose]

You sir, are a xenophobe.

Intel's own tech docs

[Visaris]

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.