This news has made AMD'ers happy

G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips,comp.sys.intel (More info?)

Seems that for one week this past month, there were more AMD-based desktops
sold than Intel-based.

http://www.technewsworld.com/story/hardware/33636.html

For the week ending April 24th, 52% of retail desktops were AMD, and only
47% were Intel. Minor, temporary victory? Absolutely. Just a victory in one
geographical market, North America? Sure. Just represents retail sales only?
Yup. Achieved in the middle of an overall bad quarter? Possibly.

But has this situation ever arisen before, where AMD outsold Intel? I've
never seen it, ever.

Yousuf Khan

--
Humans: contact me at ykhan at rogers dot com
Spambots: just send mail to above address ;-)
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips,comp.sys.intel (More info?)

"Yousuf Khan" <news.20.bbbl67@spamgourmet.com> wrote in message
news:cTVlc.52265$DrD1.17933@news04.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com...
> Seems that for one week this past month, there were more AMD-based
desktops
> sold than Intel-based.
>
> http://www.technewsworld.com/story/hardware/33636.html
>
> For the week ending April 24th, 52% of retail desktops were AMD, and only
> 47% were Intel. Minor, temporary victory? Absolutely. Just a victory in
one
> geographical market, North America? Sure. Just represents retail sales
only?
> Yup. Achieved in the middle of an overall bad quarter? Possibly.
>
> But has this situation ever arisen before, where AMD outsold Intel? I've
> never seen it, ever.
>
> Yousuf Khan
>

Yep, at the present time, AMD sports a better CPU at a lower price so it is
no wonder they are outselling Intel. Good competition between these two will
only help the consumer.

Allan
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips,comp.sys.intel (More info?)

In article <cTVlc.52265$DrD1.17933
@news04.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com>, news.20.bbbl67
@spamgourmet.com says...
> Seems that for one week this past month, there were more AMD-based desktops
> sold than Intel-based.
>
> http://www.technewsworld.com/story/hardware/33636.html
>
> For the week ending April 24th, 52% of retail desktops were AMD, and only
> 47% were Intel. Minor, temporary victory? Absolutely. Just a victory in one
> geographical market, North America? Sure. Just represents retail sales only?
> Yup. Achieved in the middle of an overall bad quarter? Possibly.
>
> But has this situation ever arisen before, where AMD outsold Intel? I've
> never seen it, ever.

Bums me out. The prices for AMD widgets has gone up, just when
I'm about to dive in. Bastards! ;-)

Serioulsy, I've got the guts picked out, simply thinking about a
case and a graphics card. Suggestions? Note that the case must
support SuSE and dual monitors. ;-)

--
Keith
 

Stacey

Distinguished
Apr 2, 2004
1,760
0
19,780
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips,comp.sys.intel (More info?)

Allan Parent wrote:

>
> "Yousuf Khan" <news.20.bbbl67@spamgourmet.com> wrote in message
>>
>> But has this situation ever arisen before, where AMD outsold Intel? I've
>> never seen it, ever.
>>
>> Yousuf Khan
>>
>
> Yep, at the present time, AMD sports a better CPU at a lower price so it
> is no wonder they are outselling Intel.

That and prescott appears to be a flop... I'm sure not selling or even
sugesting anyone buy P4 systems with things the way they are now.

--

Stacey
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips,comp.sys.intel (More info?)

"Yousuf Khan" <news.20.bbbl67@spamgourmet.com> wrote in message
news:cTVlc.52265$DrD1.17933@news04.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com...
> For the week ending April 24th, 52% of retail desktops were AMD, and only
> 47% were Intel. Minor, temporary victory? Absolutely. Just a victory in
one
> geographical market, North America? Sure. Just represents retail sales
only?
> Yup. Achieved in the middle of an overall bad quarter? Possibly.
>
> But has this situation ever arisen before, where AMD outsold Intel? I've
> never seen it, ever.

Yes it has... for an entire month even. I don't see why its such a big
surprise, AMD has always been strong in retail.
http://www.findarticles.com/cf_dls/m4PRN/1999_Feb_26/53962027/p1/article.jhtml

The more things change, the more they stay the same.
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips,comp.sys.intel (More info?)

"Yousuf Khan" <news.20.bbbl67@spamgourmet.com> wrote:

> Seems that for one week this past month, there were more AMD-based desktops
>sold than Intel-based.
>
>http://www.technewsworld.com/story/hardware/33636.html

Umm... That's RETAIL, and ignores business sales and such.

>For the week ending April 24th, 52% of retail desktops were AMD, and only
>47% were Intel. Minor, temporary victory? Absolutely. Just a victory in one
>geographical market, North America? Sure. Just represents retail sales only?
>Yup. Achieved in the middle of an overall bad quarter? Possibly.
>
>But has this situation ever arisen before, where AMD outsold Intel? I've
>never seen it, ever.

They didn't outsell Intel.
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips,comp.sys.intel (More info?)

"Allan Parent" <allanp@nospamformecharter.net> wrote:

>Yep, at the present time, AMD sports a better CPU at a lower price so it is
>no wonder they are outselling Intel.

But they didn't.
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips,comp.sys.intel (More info?)

"Suen Lee" <sulee@ucalgary.ca> wrote in message
news:2t0mc.2269$uN4.2260@clgrps12...
> > But has this situation ever arisen before, where AMD outsold Intel? I've
> > never seen it, ever.
>
> Yes it has... for an entire month even. I don't see why its such a big
> surprise, AMD has always been strong in retail.
>
http://www.findarticles.com/cf_dls/m4PRN/1999_Feb_26/53962027/p1/article.jhtml
>
> The more things change, the more they stay the same.

Ah, good find.

Yousuf Khan
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips,comp.sys.intel (More info?)

"chrisv" <chrisv@nospam.invalid> wrote in message
news:7mnh90l8g3ak7h8to4htu8b7ms1ji5ldl0@4ax.com...
> "Yousuf Khan" <news.20.bbbl67@spamgourmet.com> wrote:
>
> > Seems that for one week this past month, there were more AMD-based
desktops
> >sold than Intel-based.
> >
> >http://www.technewsworld.com/story/hardware/33636.html
>
> Umm... That's RETAIL, and ignores business sales and such.
>
> >For the week ending April 24th, 52% of retail desktops were AMD, and only
> >47% were Intel. Minor, temporary victory? Absolutely. Just a victory in
one
> >geographical market, North America? Sure. Just represents retail sales
only?
> >Yup. Achieved in the middle of an overall bad quarter? Possibly.
> >
> >But has this situation ever arisen before, where AMD outsold Intel? I've
> >never seen it, ever.
>
> They didn't outsell Intel.
>

Intel still sold over 80% of all CPUs (something like 83%). They killed in
the notebook market and server markets which have the highest margins.
Thus, Intel likely profited far more than AMD. It is still a great sign for
AMD. We'll see what happens this next quarter when Intel ups the ante with
Grantsdale/Alderwood and a 3.6 GHz part along with Dothan.
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips,comp.sys.intel (More info?)

On Tue, 4 May 2004 22:56:09 -0400, KR Williams <krw@att.biz> wrote:

>In article <cTVlc.52265$DrD1.17933
>@news04.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com>, news.20.bbbl67
>@spamgourmet.com says...
>> Seems that for one week this past month, there were more AMD-based desktops
>> sold than Intel-based.
>>
>> http://www.technewsworld.com/story/hardware/33636.html
>>
>> For the week ending April 24th, 52% of retail desktops were AMD, and only
>> 47% were Intel. Minor, temporary victory? Absolutely. Just a victory in one
>> geographical market, North America? Sure. Just represents retail sales only?
>> Yup. Achieved in the middle of an overall bad quarter? Possibly.
>>
>> But has this situation ever arisen before, where AMD outsold Intel? I've
>> never seen it, ever.
>
>Bums me out. The prices for AMD widgets has gone up, just when
>I'm about to dive in. Bastards! ;-)
>
>Serioulsy, I've got the guts picked out, simply thinking about a
>case and a graphics card. Suggestions? Note that the case must
>support SuSE and dual monitors. ;-)

Hmmm, I'm nearly ready to take the toe-dip(?) myself.:) For a graphics
card, nVidia has come a long way on the 2D and I'm still nervous about
previous ATI "driver of the week" syndrome results. For a case, I never
even bother to look beyond Antec now but choose carefully according to the
power supply if included - the TruePower ones have a thermistor controlled
fan in the P/S and special connectors for controlling the case fans off the
same temp measurement. The Plus AMG cases seem to work fine in our office
and I'm looking at that or the Lifestyle series Sonata for my home system.
Of course, all their cases satisfy the AMD design criteria for airflow
though I'd hope that's true of all the other brands.

Rgds, George Macdonald

"Just because they're paranoid doesn't mean you're not psychotic" - Who, me??
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips,comp.sys.intel (More info?)

In article <5kqi90hmg5e6mufh9k9dbslujscl63cabk@4ax.com>,
fammacd=!SPAM^nothanks@tellurian.com says...
> On Tue, 4 May 2004 22:56:09 -0400, KR Williams <krw@att.biz> wrote:
>
> >In article <cTVlc.52265$DrD1.17933
> >@news04.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com>, news.20.bbbl67
> >@spamgourmet.com says...
> >> Seems that for one week this past month, there were more AMD-based desktops
> >> sold than Intel-based.
> >>
> >> http://www.technewsworld.com/story/hardware/33636.html
> >>
> >> For the week ending April 24th, 52% of retail desktops were AMD, and only
> >> 47% were Intel. Minor, temporary victory? Absolutely. Just a victory in one
> >> geographical market, North America? Sure. Just represents retail sales only?
> >> Yup. Achieved in the middle of an overall bad quarter? Possibly.
> >>
> >> But has this situation ever arisen before, where AMD outsold Intel? I've
> >> never seen it, ever.
> >
> >Bums me out. The prices for AMD widgets has gone up, just when
> >I'm about to dive in. Bastards! ;-)
> >
> >Serioulsy, I've got the guts picked out, simply thinking about a
> >case and a graphics card. Suggestions? Note that the case must
> >support SuSE and dual monitors. ;-)
>
> Hmmm, I'm nearly ready to take the toe-dip(?) myself.:) For a graphics
> card, nVidia has come a long way on the 2D and I'm still nervous about
> previous ATI "driver of the week" syndrome results.

Well... Graphics cards look like a big bugaboo. Unless anyone
can convince me otherwise, I think I'm going safe: Matrox G550.
I'm really a 2D kinda guy anyway (and dual monitors are a must).

BTW, my board of choice is the Tyan 2875S and a Opteron 144. I'd
like to go more, but the CFO has already expanded the budget a
few times. Going back for even more may get expensive. ;-).

> For a case, I never
> even bother to look beyond Antec now but choose carefully according to the
> power supply if included - the TruePower ones have a thermistor controlled
> fan in the P/S and special connectors for controlling the case fans off the
> same temp measurement.

Ok... How about the SX1040BII:
http://www.newegg.com/app/ViewProductDesc.asp?description=11-129-
120&depa=0 (sorry for the split)

> The Plus AMG cases seem to work fine in our office
> and I'm looking at that or the Lifestyle series Sonata for my home system.

The Sonata didn't look all that interesting, though I'm willing
to be convinced otherwise.

I'm also 99.44% sure I'm going with SuSE (they've even gotten
smart and are packaging the 64b version along with the 32b
package).


--
Keith
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips,comp.sys.intel (More info?)

"KR Williams" <krw@att.biz> wrote in message
news:MPG.1b037c1d2e49a951989813@news1.news.adelphia.net...

> Well... Graphics cards look like a big bugaboo. Unless anyone
> can convince me otherwise, I think I'm going safe: Matrox G550.
> I'm really a 2D kinda guy anyway (and dual monitors are a must).
>
> BTW, my board of choice is the Tyan 2875S and a Opteron 144. I'd
> like to go more, but the CFO has already expanded the budget a
> few times. Going back for even more may get expensive. ;-).

Any suggestions on what we should put in our next desktop box for our
top developers? Our current box has dual 2.4Ghz Xeons on a Tyan i7505
Thunder (S2665), 4 512Mb ECC DIMMs, a 3Ware 7500-4LP with 4 120Gb Maxtor
drives. The graphics card is a Matrox Parhelia with two 18" LCD monitors
(Currently NEC LCD1850X).

Our plan is tentatively a dual Opteron box with 4 SATA RAID drives,
probably using a 3Ware controller as well. We're hoping for 4Gb of RAM as
dual 128-bit memory busses. I've looked at many motherboards and they all
have large numbers of insane drawbacks. (Who thought it was a good idea to
connect the onboard gigabit LAN to the legacy 32-bit/33Mhz PCI bus?)

I'd love suggestions on the graphics card and motherboard especially.
Also SATA RAID recommendations would be appreciated. Anybody have a gut
reaction of whether a developer would prefer dual xeons or dual opterons,
assuming they're not religious.

DS
 

rush

Distinguished
Apr 4, 2004
214
0
18,680
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips,comp.sys.intel (More info?)

"Yousuf Khan" <news.20.bbbl67@spamgourmet.com> wrote :


> http://www.technewsworld.com/story/hardware/33636.html
>
> For the week ending April 24th, 52% of retail desktops were AMD, and
> only 47% were Intel.

I guess DELL is not enough retail for them so it was skipped in the
counts


Pozdrawiam.
--
RusH //
http://pulse.pdi.net/~rush/qv30/
Like ninjas, true hackers are shrouded in secrecy and mystery.
You may never know -- UNTIL IT'S TOO LATE.
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips,comp.sys.intel (More info?)

On Tue, 04 May 2004 23:42:00 GMT, "Yousuf Khan"
<news.20.bbbl67@spamgourmet.com> wrote:
> Seems that for one week this past month, there were more AMD-based desktops
>sold than Intel-based.
>
>http://www.technewsworld.com/story/hardware/33636.html
>
>For the week ending April 24th, 52% of retail desktops were AMD, and only
>47% were Intel. Minor, temporary victory? Absolutely. Just a victory in one
>geographical market, North America? Sure. Just represents retail sales only?
>Yup. Achieved in the middle of an overall bad quarter? Possibly.
>
>But has this situation ever arisen before, where AMD outsold Intel? I've
>never seen it, ever.

Yes it has, at least in the very narrow market that is defined as
"retail desktops".

Note that "retail desktops" only includes something like 15% of the
world market. Dell need not apply at all, they don't sell into retail
channels, just mail order. Business desktops don't count either, and
certainly laptops, workstations and servers aren't counted here. Only
the Compaq Presarios and eMachines of the world sold at CompUSA, Best
Buy, etc. Ohh, and this is only in North America, so all in all
you're looking at a very small portion of the world market.

As mentioned above, this is NOT the first time this has happened
either. Back in the K6-2 days and early Athlon days there were times
when AMD was beating Intel in the North American retail desktop market
as well. I think they got up to about 60% of this market at their
peak.

In short, this story is lots of hot air, very little substance.

-------------
Tony Hill
hilla <underscore> 20 <at> yahoo <dot> ca
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips,comp.sys.intel (More info?)

KR Williams <krw@att.biz> wrote:

>Well... Graphics cards look like a big bugaboo. Unless anyone
>can convince me otherwise, I think I'm going safe: Matrox G550.
>I'm really a 2D kinda guy anyway (and dual monitors are a must).

That's what I've bought for my last couple office PC's. Just bought
one a month ago for my latest. They are kind of annoyingly expensive
for an "old tech" card, though...
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips,comp.sys.intel (More info?)

David Schwartz wrote:

> Our plan is tentatively a dual Opteron box with 4 SATA RAID drives,
> probably using a 3Ware controller as well. We're hoping for 4Gb of
> RAM as dual 128-bit memory busses. I've looked at many motherboards
> and they all have large numbers of insane drawbacks. (Who thought
> it was a good idea to connect the onboard gigabit LAN to the legacy
> 32-bit/33Mhz PCI bus?)

http://anandtech.com/chipsets/showdoc.html?i=2004&p=6
nForce3-250Gb: On-Chip Gigabit LAN
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips,comp.sys.intel (More info?)

In comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips David Schwartz <davids@webmaster.com> wrote:
> I'd love suggestions on the graphics card and motherboard especially.

Continue using Matrox cards, their 2D image quality is excellent. For
motherboards, I've got good experience with Tyan Thunder K8W. If it's
too expensive, a Tiger K8W would be cheaper (and mostly as good).

--
Bjørn-Ove Heimsund
Centre for Integrated Petroleum Research
University of Bergen, Norway
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips,comp.sys.intel (More info?)

Tony Hill wrote:
> Yes it has, at least in the very narrow market that is defined as
> "retail desktops".
>
> Note that "retail desktops" only includes something like 15% of the
> world market. Dell need not apply at all, they don't sell into retail
> channels, just mail order. Business desktops don't count either, and
> certainly laptops, workstations and servers aren't counted here. Only
> the Compaq Presarios and eMachines of the world sold at CompUSA, Best
> Buy, etc. Ohh, and this is only in North America, so all in all
> you're looking at a very small portion of the world market.

Which was all mentioned in the original posting.

> As mentioned above, this is NOT the first time this has happened
> either. Back in the K6-2 days and early Athlon days there were times
> when AMD was beating Intel in the North American retail desktop market
> as well. I think they got up to about 60% of this market at their
> peak.

Although at that time, the one difference was that Cyrix was still a strong
contender, having 15% of the retail NA market. Another difference was that
back then this was all achieved on the back of a scorched-earth price war
between the manufacturers. Intel had it's high-end and low-end products, it
let the low-end participate in the muck against the "cloners" at that time,
while it continued to rake in profits from the high-end. This time, there's
no scorched-earth competition going on.

So there are similarities to 99, but then there are also major differences.

Yousuf Khan
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips,comp.sys.intel (More info?)

Judd wrote:
> Intel still sold over 80% of all CPUs (something like 83%). They
> killed in the notebook market and server markets which have the
> highest margins. Thus, Intel likely profited far more than AMD. It
> is still a great sign for AMD. We'll see what happens this next
> quarter when Intel ups the ante with Grantsdale/Alderwood and a 3.6
> GHz part along with Dothan.

Actually, I think the overall total for that one particular week was Intel
sold only 61% of all CPUs, and AMD sold between 37-38% of all CPUs.

Yousuf Khan
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips,comp.sys.intel (More info?)

On Thu, 06 May 2004 21:49:59 GMT, "Yousuf Khan"
<news.tally.bbbl67@spamgourmet.com> wrote:
>Judd wrote:
>> Intel still sold over 80% of all CPUs (something like 83%). They
>> killed in the notebook market and server markets which have the
>> highest margins. Thus, Intel likely profited far more than AMD. It
>> is still a great sign for AMD. We'll see what happens this next
>> quarter when Intel ups the ante with Grantsdale/Alderwood and a 3.6
>> GHz part along with Dothan.
>
>Actually, I think the overall total for that one particular week was Intel
>sold only 61% of all CPUs, and AMD sold between 37-38% of all CPUs.

If that is indeed accurate, that would be VERY good news for AMD!
However I'd be extremely skeptical of that number, that would be more
than double the amount of chips that AMD was selling just a couple of
months earlier. If AMD managed even 20% of the total CPU market for
the week they were doing well, but I'd be surprised if the managed
anything more.

-------------
Tony Hill
hilla <underscore> 20 <at> yahoo <dot> ca
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips,comp.sys.intel (More info?)

"Tony Hill" <hilla_nospam_20@yahoo.ca> wrote in message
news:0tnl909s48uqfb1aiqpn533s2e2s4cc941@4ax.com...
> >Actually, I think the overall total for that one particular week was
Intel
> >sold only 61% of all CPUs, and AMD sold between 37-38% of all CPUs.
>
> If that is indeed accurate, that would be VERY good news for AMD!
> However I'd be extremely skeptical of that number, that would be more
> than double the amount of chips that AMD was selling just a couple of
> months earlier. If AMD managed even 20% of the total CPU market for
> the week they were doing well, but I'd be surprised if the managed
> anything more.

Well, let's remember one thing, these are all figures for a single _week_ of
production, not an entire month, let alone an entire quarter, let alone an
entire year. I think AMD can handle an extra large order for a single week
at the very least. Besides, the article never really suggested whether AMD
took that extra large share of the week due to much greater demand for its
products or simply because the overall market just shrank, during that week.
I suspect that it's mostly that it was a slow week, and AMD didn't slow down
as much as Intel did.

Yousuf Khan
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips,comp.sys.intel (More info?)

On Wed, 5 May 2004 23:34:56 -0400, KR Williams <krw@att.biz> wrote:

>In article <5kqi90hmg5e6mufh9k9dbslujscl63cabk@4ax.com>,
>fammacd=!SPAM^nothanks@tellurian.com says...
>> On Tue, 4 May 2004 22:56:09 -0400, KR Williams <krw@att.biz> wrote:
>>
>> >In article <cTVlc.52265$DrD1.17933
>> >@news04.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com>, news.20.bbbl67
>> >@spamgourmet.com says...
>> >> Seems that for one week this past month, there were more AMD-based desktops
>> >> sold than Intel-based.
>> >>
>> >> http://www.technewsworld.com/story/hardware/33636.html
>> >>
>> >> For the week ending April 24th, 52% of retail desktops were AMD, and only
>> >> 47% were Intel. Minor, temporary victory? Absolutely. Just a victory in one
>> >> geographical market, North America? Sure. Just represents retail sales only?
>> >> Yup. Achieved in the middle of an overall bad quarter? Possibly.
>> >>
>> >> But has this situation ever arisen before, where AMD outsold Intel? I've
>> >> never seen it, ever.
>> >
>> >Bums me out. The prices for AMD widgets has gone up, just when
>> >I'm about to dive in. Bastards! ;-)
>> >
>> >Serioulsy, I've got the guts picked out, simply thinking about a
>> >case and a graphics card. Suggestions? Note that the case must
>> >support SuSE and dual monitors. ;-)
>>
>> Hmmm, I'm nearly ready to take the toe-dip(?) myself.:) For a graphics
>> card, nVidia has come a long way on the 2D and I'm still nervous about
>> previous ATI "driver of the week" syndrome results.
>
>Well... Graphics cards look like a big bugaboo. Unless anyone
>can convince me otherwise, I think I'm going safe: Matrox G550.
>I'm really a 2D kinda guy anyway (and dual monitors are a must).

Yeah I *think* Matrox still has the best 2D, though it's been a long while
since I bought one - G200... probably still better than even current nVidia
and ATI for 2D.

>BTW, my board of choice is the Tyan 2875S and a Opteron 144. I'd
>like to go more, but the CFO has already expanded the budget a
>few times. Going back for even more may get expensive. ;-).
>
>> For a case, I never
>> even bother to look beyond Antec now but choose carefully according to the
>> power supply if included - the TruePower ones have a thermistor controlled
>> fan in the P/S and special connectors for controlling the case fans off the
>> same temp measurement.
>
>Ok... How about the SX1040BII:
>http://www.newegg.com/app/ViewProductDesc.asp?description=11-129-
>120&depa=0 (sorry for the split)

In the office, I have a SX840 for a user system and SX1240 (6x5.25 external
bays) for our server. Those are both older models and beige of course but
I like them - the swing-out side panels are nice and cable routing is neat:
I tie-wire the mbrd and rear fan wiring into the flanged bar across the
upper half of the case and it makes for a clean interior.

I dunno if the black SX models have as good a finish as the beige, which
still has baked enamel, but I'd hope so. The 660AMGs we have are nice but
that grey metallic finish is just regular paint and scratches more easily.
With two standard rear exhaust fans you shouldn't need any extra fans - not
sure if those case fans have individual thermistor control or not. The
SmartPower P/S fan is temp controlled so it should not be noisy unless
maybe you're "pounding" on it.

On the SX models we have, you don't have to have those feet sticking out -
if the standing surface is stable, you can swivel the feet in under the
case.

>> The Plus AMG cases seem to work fine in our office
>> and I'm looking at that or the Lifestyle series Sonata for my home system.
>
>The Sonata didn't look all that interesting, though I'm willing
>to be convinced otherwise.

I haven't tried it myself but others have made favorable comments.

>I'm also 99.44% sure I'm going with SuSE (they've even gotten
>smart and are packaging the 64b version along with the 32b
>package).

Sounds like you're gonna have a lot of fun.:)

Rgds, George Macdonald

"Just because they're paranoid doesn't mean you're not psychotic" - Who, me??
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips,comp.sys.intel (More info?)

>
> Serioulsy, I've got the guts picked out, simply thinking about a
> case and a graphics card. Suggestions? Note that the case must
> support SuSE and dual monitors. ;-)

You mean someone not only makes cases that are OS-dependent
but they also support dual monitor ;-)
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips,comp.sys.intel (More info?)

In article <c7ccuv$eor$1@nntp.webmaster.com>,
davids@webmaster.com says...
>
> "KR Williams" <krw@att.biz> wrote in message
> news:MPG.1b037c1d2e49a951989813@news1.news.adelphia.net...
>
> > Well... Graphics cards look like a big bugaboo. Unless anyone
> > can convince me otherwise, I think I'm going safe: Matrox G550.
> > I'm really a 2D kinda guy anyway (and dual monitors are a must).
> >
> > BTW, my board of choice is the Tyan 2875S and a Opteron 144. I'd
> > like to go more, but the CFO has already expanded the budget a
> > few times. Going back for even more may get expensive. ;-).
>
> Any suggestions on what we should put in our next desktop box for our
> top developers? Our current box has dual 2.4Ghz Xeons on a Tyan i7505
> Thunder (S2665), 4 512Mb ECC DIMMs, a 3Ware 7500-4LP with 4 120Gb Maxtor
> drives. The graphics card is a Matrox Parhelia with two 18" LCD monitors
> (Currently NEC LCD1850X).

Without knowing your build process, this would be an impossible
task. If they build on their own systems (ick) you may want to
give them some peachy-keen latest stuff. If you're doing
software for the general public, you'll likely want a variety of
hardware to test/develop on. If you're doing large development,
you really ought to have a background build system that doesn't'
rely on the developer's desktop much at all.

In any case, give them at *least* two 20" monitors in a dual-
screen setup. If you can afford laptops, do the same. Dual
screen is a huge benefit to anyone doing development. Flat-
displays are an incremental bonus.
>
> Our plan is tentatively a dual Opteron box with 4 SATA RAID drives,
> probably using a 3Ware controller as well. We're hoping for 4Gb of RAM as
> dual 128-bit memory busses. I've looked at many motherboards and they all
> have large numbers of insane drawbacks. (Who thought it was a good idea to
> connect the onboard gigabit LAN to the legacy 32-bit/33Mhz PCI bus?)

I'm assuming all of your developers work independently. If so,
fine. If they're collaborating, you'd better get a little
stronger. CVS and background builds are in your future.
Building software (or hardware in my case) just isn't reasonable
peace-meal.

> I'd love suggestions on the graphics card

So far the Matrox G550 is winning my popularity contest. It has
the reputation (as all Matro cards) of being a business graphics
card, and isn't really suitable for 3D. As is designed, so be
it.

> and motherboard especially.

That obviously depends on the processor you choose.

> Also SATA RAID recommendations would be appreciated.

Why? What are you going to do for backup? Me thinks you have
the horsed after the cart.

> Anybody have a gut
> reaction of whether a developer would prefer dual xeons or dual opterons,
> assuming they're not religious.

This "developer" certainly does. Though I don't do that icky
"software" stuff. ;-). Indeed if I truly had my choice, well
nevermind , the CFO would never approve.

--
Keith
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips,comp.sys.intel (More info?)

In article <c7djte$k3g$1@toralf.uib.no>, Bjorn-
Ove.Heimsund@uib.no says...
> In comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips David Schwartz <davids@webmaster.com> wrote:
> > I'd love suggestions on the graphics card and motherboard especially.
>
> Continue using Matrox cards, their 2D image quality is excellent. For
> motherboards, I've got good experience with Tyan Thunder K8W. If it's
> too expensive, a Tiger K8W would be cheaper (and mostly as good).

Umm, come again? Did you mean K8W and K8WS? Please tell me the
difference (other than the obvious). I might just pull the
trigger tomorrow, certainly by Monday.

--
Keith