Slashdot Mirror
AMD 50% At Dell in 2007
A reader writes: "Reports from Taiwan chipmakers indicate that AMD may make a very large percentage of Dell's sales this year." AMD, of course, has made no comments in regard to this; but if the reports are correct, then it's another setback for Intel in the server market.
I'm sure this number was yanked out of the ass of some analyst somewhere, but last I checked Woodcrest is still faster than Rev F for 98% of the applications out there. Intel is doing a full court press from a sales perspective with their teams out there and are going to introduce quad core by the end of the year.
What makes someone think Dell can flip 50% of it's business to AMD? The best way Dell can do anything is to drop the price. I don't think AMD is in the position to want to go into a price war just yet...
As a rock-in-roll Physicist once said, No matter where you go, there you are.
I think it's great that AMD is more in demand, but will they have the manufacturing capacity to keep their customers supplied?
This shows how well the AMD anti-trust case worked. Intel backed of their preditory discount schemes for fear of being ruled anti-competitive and then it no longer made sense for Dell to be an Intel only shop
I before you start calling your dell rep for details, or your broker to buy stock. Just remember one thing. Dell has been rumoring this for YEARS and they still aren't seriously carrying AMD products. They like to use this to try and negotiate the best possible deal from Intel. Incorporating AMD would in theorey be easy to do, but integrating it into its supply line would take some time... plus dell would have to pour marketing dollars in to make customers feel comfortable with the change (think of the experience with coca-cola classic and coke II).
Personally (and off topic), I would love to see this happen. But don't count on it any time soon.
Victory is gained, not in knowing your opponents next move, but in preempting them.
If Dell took AMD seriously in 2006 that would have happened, but not so sure about 2007..
Same with IBM, both only just now really started taking AMD seriously and did so just in time for Woodcrest to come and tip price-performance back to Intel systems. AMD still has the memory performance advantage, but Woodcrest/Conroe's 4 ops per clock and relatively aggressive pricing mean AMD has to do something. I don't know AMD's schedule for quad-core offhand, but know Intel Clovertown is supposed to be probably 2nd quarter of 07. It's possible that in going to quad-core Intel's memory architecture could choke them and give AMD a more thorough advantage, or that AMD also gets similar performance while going to quad-core as Intel gets with Woodcrest/Conroe and the scales tip to AMD again.
XML is like violence. If it doesn't solve the problem, use more.
Not really. Core 2 Duo is a boon on the desktop and laptop fronts, but beyond dual-socket servers, you're not getting much. I mean, at 4-way, 8-way, and n-way configs, Hypertransport allows AMD's offerings to be much more competitive. And when we move next year to 4-core chips squaring off against 4-core chips, bandwidth contention is gonna be a huge factor with Intel's MCMs and being on a 1333 MHz FSB for 4 cores.
If only Apple moved to AMD ...
http://sohilsblog.blogspot.com