Henri Richard explains why AMD failed to gain more marketshare

Page 20 - Seeking answers? Join the Tom's Hardware community: where nearly two million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Status
Not open for further replies.
Disdain for AMDroids? Bashing a company that seriously doesn't need it right now with all the monopoly from Intel in a public article that is supposed to be objective is your way of expressing disregard for people who are not as stupid as they definitely should be :lol:? I don't get it at all...
 

If AMD's server prospects don't look so hot in the short term(at least), what is wrong with stating this and fleshing out one's reasons for it.
 
Yep and intel spokespeople were saying it would be released in 2H 2009 also. 😗

http://www.infoworld.com/d/hardware/intel-may-not-ship-nehalem-ex-until-early-2010-383

Last thing they said that about was Larrabee. I'll give you a hint Chad - late chips are rarely late for good reasons.

You're an absolute fool if you believe intel will be able to compete with MC on price/performance. Believe me, a lot of people will be switching once MC is released - before Nehalem-EX is. :)
 

Jenny you can dream that Nehalem-Ex will be the same kind of server hit that Barfelona was, all you like, but let's revisit this thread later this year.

You're an absolute fool if you believe intel will be able to compete with MC on price/performance. Believe me, a lot of people will be switching once MC is released - before Nehalem-EX is. :)
Click to expand...
AMD server share will be lower at the end of 2010 then it was at the end of 2009, Intel server share will be higher at the end of 2010 then it was at 2009.

That is all you need to know Jenny.

AMD will obviously be desperately trying to hook in customers with Mangy Corpse, trying to sell them on upgrading to Bullduster later on when it comes out, but 2010 will not be a good year for AMD or for you. :lol:
 

Competitive isn't the right word, Dominant is. 😀
 
Chad, I'd be willing to bet you a small fortune that AMD will increase server market share in 2010.

The simple fact is, Nehalem-EX is a hot, powerhungry and stupidly expensive halo product that is already 4 months late. That doesn't bode well for it increasing market share if you think about it clearly does it? :lol:
 


I don't think the figures are skewed when taken in context to the article that was looking at the last quarter rather than the last year.
 


ATI had a 50% increase in revenue in Q4 compared to Q3. How hard is it to figure out that they sold a lot of expensive high-end, high-margin products and not so many cheap, low margin ones?
 

Let's make this an avatar bet.

The loser has to use the avatar of the winner's choice for a period of 6 months.

The simple fact is, Nehalem-EX is a hot, powerhungry and stupidly expensive halo product that is already 4 months late. That doesn't bode well for it increasing market share if you think about it clearly does it? :lol:
Click to expand...
Where is a link to these facts that Nehalem-EX is hotter or more power hungry than its competitors in the markets it is being aimed at?

That is just your bullship statements.

Nehalem-Ex allows Intel to take over segments of the server market they hadn't been that competitive in, in recent years.

Also, Nehalem-Ex is not the only server based product Intel has at its disposal.

Nehalem x5570 2s/8c has been doing great business for Intel and this product is going to get upgraded to Westmere Hex cores on 32nm.

Anyone who reads the above and still can't comprehend how 2010 is not going to be a good year for AMD in Server must be retarded.

So do you want to do the avatar bet Jenny? :lol:


 
Use your brain Chad. Nehalem EP is already a power hog pulling 200w peak, what do you think doubling it up will do? Why is it late? Simple deduction points to...an extremely hot and hungry chip.

MC has basically doubled the cores, kept the same TDP compared to istanbul while losing very little in terms of clocks thanks to an ever improving 45nm process at AMD.

When people look at the comparitive cost of the platform, add in Bulldozer upgradability they will abandon intel en-masse. 2010 will be the return of the Opteron big time, with that in mind...

Sure I'll do that avatar bet lol. 😀
 

Yea, that and the fact Atoms numbers increases the overall %, so, if the market grows by 5%, and thats due mainly to Atom, the numbers will be skewed, as the %'s shift, tho again, it depends on the margins of whats being sold, thus higher margins and minimal marketshare gains, or even a loss
 


You very well could be right that Nehalem Ep could be a stinky turd but it wont have this mass exodus effect you think it will. We cannot buy new equipment unless we are at the end of our depreciation schedules here and the powers that be wont hear of AMD anything. Evidently some bitter pill of the past that they cannot forgive or refuse to reconcile. Actually, this is the second place I have been that it is treated like profanity to even suggest AMD in the datacenter.

 
Yep I know many of these places are stuck in their ways and it won't be easy to change minds.

They'll have second thoughts when presented with the evidence however. MC will be so cheap and powerful that everything else will look like idiocy in comparison.

Why will it be so? Simple, it has to be like that. AMD needs MC to be bought on a large scale in order to pave the way for Bulldozer. I really do expect MC to be staggeringly cheap and powerful, I guess we'll see soon enough.
 
Some of these things go in layers as well. A couple of mission critical servers we have here actually do not have an AMD platform in their approved hardware to even be covered by their professional services. It goes deep in some cases.
 
Yep I know, and clearly a lot of companies will be sticking with intel come hell or high water.

How exactly do these powers that be at your work figure AMD powers 4/5 top HPC's btw? Magic? This sort of thing should count when it comes to making the right choice.
 
From Anandtech

Server CPUs in 2010
AMD’s best core in 2010 is a slightly improved revision of the current six-core Opteron “Istanbul” with the following additions:

• Finally a “real” C1E state which reduces power for each core that is idleing
• Support for DDR-3

In theory, DDR-3 1333 offers 66% higher bandwidth, but in practice the Stream benchmark does not measure more than a 25% boost in bandwidth. The latency of going off-die is about the same. That means that the performance increase in most server applications will not be tangible. Only the most bandwidth intensive HPC applications will get a boost of 10 to 20%.

Currently, AMD's six-core Opteron can match the performance of Intel’s quadcore Xeon 5500 at the same clockspeed in some important server applications: OLAP databases, virtualization and web applications. Intel’s best Xeon wins with a significant margin in OLTP, ERP and rendering. A large part of the HPC market is a lost cause: a quadcore Intel Xeon 5570 at 2.93 GHz is about twice as fast as a AMD Opteron 2389 at 2.9 GHz. The fact that we could not find any Opteron 2435 results in LS-Dyna is another indication of what to expect: the 10-20% higher performance in HPC applications will not be a large step forward.

Intel is going to increase performance by 20-30% per CPU (50% more cores), while AMD’s CPUs will see only marginal increases. So basically, Intel’s performance advantage is going to grow by 20 to 30%, except in HPC workloads where it is already running circles around the competition. Not an enviable position to be in for AMD.

Suppose that you are the strategic brain behind AMD. The competition offers better “per chip” and “per core” performance. The last thing you want to do is to offer the same kind of server platform. If a six-core Opteron (“Lisbon") goes head to head with a six-core Xeon (“westmere EP”), it will not be pretty: the Intel chip will beat the AMD chip in performance and performance/watt (remember, westmere EP is a 32 nm CPU). Despite this, AMD found some clever ways to make their server platforms interesting…
Click to expand...

 
Forgot to add from the above link:

In which usage scenario’s are Intel’s offerings less compelling? The Nehalem-EX is a powerful platform, but it is also a completely different one than the “Westmere EP” platform. The Nehalem-EX's most important market is the 4-socket/8-socket x86 market, where about 400,000 servers are sold per year, or about 5% of the total x86 server market. It is also a pretty complex platform with two I/O hubs and 16 (!) memory buffers chips on a 4-socket board. The Nehalem EX platform does not only want to conquer the high end 4 and 8-socket x86 server market, it also wants to convince the more paranoid RISC and Itanium buyers:

AMD uses the same building blocks for it’s midrange 4-socket platform as it does for the high-end 2-socket platform and calls it the G34 infrastructure. The consequence is that the RAS features stay the same, and as a result, AMD can not completely compete with the Nehalem EX platform when it comes to RAS. But that is not really a problem, as some of the "high-end" RAS features aren't used by 98% of the x86 crowd who buy the more expensive 2-socket and 4-socket servers. To compete with the 8 core/16 thread Nehalem EX, AMD puts two DDR3 Istanbuls together, which communicate via a hypertransport link and calls it a twelve core Opteron 6100 (Socket G34). A server based on the Opteron 6100 can probably come close to the performance of the lower-end and midrange Nehalem EX, but it is a lot cheaper to design and produce. The disadvantage is that it only has 12 DIMM slots per CPU, while the Nehalem EX has 16 DIMM slots per CPU.

Our first impression is that AMD will find it hard to win the high end database and ERP market. The quadcore Nehalem 5500 already outperforms the six-core Opteron “Istanbul” by a large margin (30-50%). The Opteron 6100 also has 50% more cores, but it is likely that a “native octalcore” will scale a bit better than a two times 6-core design. For the virtualization market, the higher amount of DIMM slots are an advantage for the Nehalem EX. At first sight, it looks like it will be pretty tough for AMD to regain market share in this part of the server market.
Click to expand...
 
Moderator - Just ignore Anandtech. They are not worth reading anymore. There are so many alternative sites out there. In comparison, Anandtech becomes a waste of time.

Wow, I didn't know they were THAT ignorant...
 
Well that's why I couldn't figure out what i was to be looking at Cryslayer. That would be the last place on earth I would go for any scoop on Intel anything .
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom