AMD in Dell - does it matter?

[P4Man]

Most of those who know the real benefits of an AMD or an Intel processor, at the processor level, usually build their own boxes based on their preferred CPU.
<..>
This recent announcement probably will help AMD more than Dell and in fact, is already helping AMD. AMD doesn't really advertise much. But now, with a very top tier name like Dell making huge headlines about AMD, suddenly AMD is becomming more of a household (and corporate) name.

Some of the effects will be rather immediate and will increase over time, particularly when those same blind corporations start hearing about AMD processors in their own DP Departments. "Buying daughter a PC for graduation... hearing good things at work about AMD... let's try a PC with one of those."

Its only the underinformed that would claim corporations are "blind" just because they aren't buying cpu's from your preferred cpu vendor; corporations have vastly different requirements and desires besides only the best cpu for the job. Any company still buying Xeon servers from Dell, most likely does so for good reason (single source supplier, support, good mix for them of ras, features, price,..), not because they are blind or clueless, even though the cpu's or system architecture might be second class compared to opty..

To prove they are not blind, in just a few years opteron conquered 40% of the conservative 4S market, without Dell's support that is. Opteron 8xx really doesn't need TV adds or full paper adds from Dell, and Dell embracing it will do precious little to its credibilty in this market. Its already more than credible there: in fact, it is nor only credible, but even so wanted, corporations are switching vendors just to be able to buy Opterons. Dell could no longer ignore its customers crying out for Opterons, so it decided to offer them. Don't tell me this will increase AMD's perception. People/corporations buying 4+S systems are rarely underinformed or brainwashed by tv adds.

Dell embracing and agressively promoting A64 or Turion for consumers might still help though, even though AMD's "street credibility" is already an order of magnitude better than what it used to be. But in mid range server market, AMD just doesn't need an introduction anymore, certainly not by Dell (it will still help sales though, especially to companies single sourcing from Dell).

 

[MG37221]

Most of those who know the real benefits of an AMD or an Intel processor, at the processor level, usually build their own boxes based on their preferred CPU.
<..>
This recent announcement probably will help AMD more than Dell and in fact, is already helping AMD. AMD doesn't really advertise much. But now, with a very top tier name like Dell making huge headlines about AMD, suddenly AMD is becomming more of a household (and corporate) name.

Some of the effects will be rather immediate and will increase over time, particularly when those same blind corporations start hearing about AMD processors in their own DP Departments. "Buying daughter a PC for graduation... hearing good things at work about AMD... let's try a PC with one of those."

Its only the underinformed that would claim corporations are "blind" just because they aren't buying cpu's from your preferred cpu vendor; corporations have vastly different requirements and desires besides only the best cpu for the job. Any company still buying Xeon servers from Dell, most likely does so for good reason (single source supplier, support, good mix for them of ras, features, price,..), not because they are blind or clueless, even though the cpu's or system architecture might be second class compared to opty..

To prove they are not blind, in just a few years opteron conquered 40% of the conservative 4S market, without Dell's support that is. Opteron 8xx really doesn't need TV adds or full paper adds from Dell, and Dell embracing it will do precious little to its credibilty in this market. Its already more than credible there: in fact, it is nor only credible, but even so wanted, corporations are switching vendors just to be able to buy Opterons. Dell could no longer ignore its customers crying out for Opterons, so it decided to offer them. Don't tell me this will increase AMD's perception. People/corporations buying 4+S systems are rarely underinformed or brainwashed by tv adds.

Dell embracing and agressively promoting A64 or Turion for consumers might still help though, even though AMD's "street credibility" is already an order of magnitude better than what it used to be. But in mid range server market, AMD just doesn't need an introduction anymore, certainly not by Dell (it will still help sales though, especially to companies single sourcing from Dell).

My corporations are blind. When the PC was initially arriving on the scene (mainframe shop), naturally the only PC to purchase was an IBM-PC, followed by an IBM-PC/AT (whopping 6MHz 80286 CPU!)

Move forward a decade and a half. Now corporate standard is Dell exclusively. It "looks better" when everything is the same brand. This from the president no less! Move forward another 1/2 decade. Company purchased on multiple merger to now become part of the largest printing company in the world. New "PC" will now be HP. Do these new machines fit? Well no but what's a few million dollars to make everything the same.

The decisions you mention aren't necessarily made by those who know what they're doing. Recommendations certainly are but the end decision is made by those looking at little more than the bottom line and that's only the immediate bottom line because this is Corporate America where short term planning is all there's gonna be because the CEO's contract is only for 1 to 3 years.

Logically, you are correct. Realistically however, you aren't even close, generally speaking.

 

[Monkeyz506]

I think it's a good accomplishment for AMD, even if it is only symbolic. The only reason I think it's more symbolic than profitable is that Dell only plans on selling AMD in 4 processor systems, which isn't a huge market.

It reminds me a lot of the announcement about a year ago when Apple said it was moving to Intel CPU's. Not exactly a huge venture, or even a profitable one, but it was symbolic.

I hope that the level of competition between these two companies remains high, because it is good for fostering technological developments and reducing prices. However, I also wish that reporting on these two companies and the products they release become fair and unbiased. I've all but stopped listening to Tom's Hardware and TGDaily when it comes to Intel because of their incredibly biased attitude. It's great that AMD's triumph's are heralded from every corner, but you also have to give Intel credit where credit is due.

Just my two cents.

 

[hergieburbur]

I think you are missing the significance of the 4 processor market. I.E. no it is not a large segment, but it is a high profit margin segment, which is important to both Dell who is suffering from lower margins and losing ground in this highly lucrative market, and AMD who is gaining ground, but who up til now has lacked a means of penetration into the many many huge companies that are pretty much exclusively Dell clients.

 

[mpjesse]

25% for a fact? Thats a bit aggresive considering we don't know the full marketshare impact of the intel core 2 yet. Don't see it happening myself. But I have been wrong in the past.

I don't think that's an unreasonable number in say... 5 years? AMD already has a 20% market share in desktops and it's even higher in servers.

I think 25% is very achieveable. And though I said it was a fact, it's actually really just educated speculation. Which usually happens to be right. Muahaha...

🙂

 

[mpjesse]

The only reason I think it's more symbolic than profitable is that Dell only plans on selling AMD in 4 processor systems, which isn't a huge market.

Umm... 4 ways are one of THE most sold configurations. They take up the least amount of rackspace and thus are very coveted. (You can't do a blade w/ an 8 way) The only segment that sells more is probably 2 way and most are those are for internet hosting businesses.

 

[P4Man]

4 ways are one of THE most sold configurations. <...> The only segment that sells more is probably 2 way

Euhm yeah, right.. interesting logic. THE most sold, except for 2 ways.. uhu.. and 2 ways is THE most sold, expect for 1 ways (mostly pedestal) servers, and the only thing selling more than those, is desktops and notebooks.. IOW, ignoring barely existing 8S and up, 4 way is far and awat THE lowest volume of all x86 systems (although revenue wise, its not nearly as insignificant).

 

[mpjesse]

You obviously have the reading comprehension of a 6th grade hillbilly. Re-read this sentence....

Umm... 4 ways are one of THE most sold configurations.

I said ONE. Not the ONLY one.

 

[dp76764]

Food for thought on this subject:
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/05/19/dell_opteron_wallstreet/

I was a bit skeptical about the direction of this article, but it does make some sense about the timing and particulars of this event.

It will be very disappointing for both companies if this is more the case then what everyone wants to believe.

If Dell really wanted to get on the Opteron bandwagon (as well they should have), they should have gotten on it at least a year ago!

It's all smoke and mirrors from Dell!

 

[P4Man]

You obviously have the reading comprehension of a 6th grade hillbilly. Re-read this sentence....

Umm... 4 ways are one of THE most sold configurations.

I said ONE. Not the ONLY one.

Oh, well.. now it all makes sense I guess.. in the same way as the statement "on land, the turtle is one of THE fastest reptiles on the planet!" makes sense ..

:roll:

 

[mcp5500]

There is a point here that is just brushed on and not put in (what I think) the right context. The author writes:

The next challenge, however, rests on the shoulders of AMD, McGregor believes. The company has successfully branded Opteron, Athlon, and to a lesser extent Turion in the public mind, but "AMD" as a brand still stands for "low-cost" and "second-tier" - leftover remnants from the era when it basically cloned Intel x86 architecture.

The Dell deal adds a great deal of weight to AMD and here is why. If you were a corporate IT manager and was tasked to recommend the next workstation solution for your company, why in the world would you recommend AMD based workstations when your job is on the line? What this deal really does is give that IT manager the leverage (cover) to justify AMD. Most corporate cultures are committed to one server brand IBM, HP, Sun and Dell and normally two workstation brands. This is just the cover the IT managers need to choose an AMD line of workstations without having to prove compatibility and value. It puts AMD on an equal footing with Intel and this is what AMD never had and is fighting for here.

 

[P4Man]

There is a point here that is just brushed on and not put in (what I think) the right context. The author writes:

The next challenge, however, rests on the shoulders of AMD, McGregor believes. The company has successfully branded Opteron, Athlon, and to a lesser extent Turion in the public mind, but "AMD" as a brand still stands for "low-cost" and "second-tier" - leftover remnants from the era when it basically cloned Intel x86 architecture.

The Dell deal adds a great deal of weight to AMD and here is why. If you were a corporate IT manager and was tasked to recommend the next workstation solution for your company, why in the world would you recommend AMD based workstations when your job is on the line? What this deal really does is give that IT manager the leverage (cover) to justify AMD. Most corporate cultures are committed to one server brand IBM, HP, Sun and Dell and normally two workstation brands. This is just the cover the IT managers need to choose an AMD line of workstations without having to prove compatibility and value. It puts AMD on an equal footing with Intel and this is what AMD never had and is fighting for here.

You can keep repeating this over and over, but it just isn't true. In just a few years AMD has conquered nearly 50% of the 4 socket x86 server market.. ! doubling year after year, and in spite of the fact neither Dell nor IBM had any (or any crediblle) 4S opteron offerings. That tells me most IT managers aren't as clueless as you try to paint them, and it even clearly shows many of them went shopping elsewhere than at their regular supplier (IBM or Dell) to be able to purchase an Opteron.

In the server market, AMD is well beyond the point where it needs more credibilty, certainly in the form of Dell embracing it..