backtop

Hardware Hell Freezes Over: Dell Goes AMD
Tuan Nguyen (Blog) - May 18, 2006 5:13 PM
Print E-mail del.icio.us 154 comment(s) - last by ribbon13.. on May 31 at 4:33 AM
Dell Opteron servers coming your way

Dell Computer today released its financial performance report for the quarter. But despite all the numbers, Dell has announced a major milestone in the history of the company: Dell will now start to offer AMD-based servers. In Dell's press release:

In the enterprise, we will launch new ninth generation servers featuring Intel's Woodcrest microprocessors. Dell will also introduce new AMD Opteron processors in our multi-processor servers by the end of the year offering a great new technology to our customers at the high-end of our server line.

Dell, up until today, had been famous for supporting Intel processors exclusively. Many have said that Dell holds an exclusive relationship in exchange for price cuts and marketing dollars.  Dell founder Michael Dell, has been mainly vague about Dell's support for AMD processors, never giving a clear direction.

Today marks a major milestone for Dell for and the industry in general. AMD is also enthusiastic about Dell's decision to offer AMD processors in its systems. "We welcome Dell, and Dell customers, to the world of AMD64," said Marty Seyer, senior vice president for AMD's Commercial Business team. Previously, DailyTech reported that Dell had acquired gaming computer company Alienware, which produced both AMD and Intel systems. Michael Dell was questioned after the Alienware purchase, on whether or not Dell would start shipping AMD systems. Dell however, continued to be vague.

Today's announcement that Dell would be using AMD's Opteron processors in its servers marks a new significant chapter for Dell. Many of Dell's customers had been repeatedly asking the Round Rock computer company to start using AMD processors because of their superior performance and power efficiency.

Earlier this year, Intel demonstrated that its upcoming Woodcrest processor was able to outperform AMD's Opteron processors in power efficiency. Dell will also be announcing servers based on Woodcrest at the same time as the Opteron servers. Some are saying that Dell's almost too-quiet announcement about using Opteron servers could be linked to AMD's anti-trust case against Intel. The chip giant is currently facing a court battle with AMD over fair competition and market monopoly.   Other analysts speculate Dell’s decision may have more to do with establishing a relationship for the upcoming K8L quad-core architecture.

Despite some what may or may not be true about Dell's announcement, it's clear that this has been a long time coming for the giant computer company. Dell earlier this year repeatedly said that it will listen to its customers -- and it has.

Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled
Looks like...
By SLCentral on 5/18/2006 5:27:24 PM , Rating: 5
Hell froze over :)




RE: Looks like...
By SLCentral on 5/18/2006 5:32:30 PM , Rating: 5
Hey, you guys stole my post and made it the topic title :p.


RE: Looks like...
By KristopherKubicki (blog) on 5/18/2006 5:33:35 PM , Rating: 5
Sucker! :)

Oh well, we were all thinking the same thing anyway.


RE: Looks like...
By PLaYaHaTeD on 5/18/2006 9:44:28 PM , Rating: 2
I wish I bought AMD stock this morning.


RE: Looks like...
By Tsuwamono on 5/18/06, Rating: -1
RE: Looks like...
By S3anister on 5/19/2006 1:25:40 AM , Rating: 2
yes, indeed it is a glorious day for those of us with AMD stock!!!! w00t!

now De11 just needs to get some AM2 platforms on the mainstream when AM2 comes out...


RE: Looks like...
By bob661 on 5/19/2006 10:53:56 AM , Rating: 2
The real jump in stock price will be when they announce desktops. I need to buy some stock.


RE: Looks like...
By Christopher1 on 5/20/2006 4:50:42 PM , Rating: 1
AMD desktop processors do perform MUCH better than Intel ones that are the same type and speed.

Less power consumption, more OOOMPH! per dollar, they are just BETTER overall.

Dell's stock WILL jump when they announce desktops with AMD processors. MY next desktop will be AMD powered after they switch to the AM2 socket.


RE: Looks like...
By zsdersw on 5/20/2006 5:52:42 PM , Rating: 4
So Conroe isn't even on your comparison shopping list this summer? Hmm.. go back to your AMD temple and continue worshipping.


RE: Looks like...
By Samus on 5/20/2006 10:11:39 PM , Rating: 2
if it comes out, it'll be nice. i'm sure it will just be another broken intel promise.


RE: Looks like...
By zsdersw on 5/20/2006 10:46:54 PM , Rating: 2
Trying out for a career in comedy, are you?


RE: Looks like...
By glennpratt on 5/22/2006 2:04:31 PM , Rating: 2
You're the one worshiping at temple, Intel's of course. It's quite funny that you don't recognize it. We all realize Intel wants their unverifiable previews to cause me to delay purchase, but I doubt they have our best interests in mind.


RE: Looks like...
By Tyler 86 on 5/22/2006 3:12:29 PM , Rating: 3
I think Conroe is gonna beat 939 and AM2 chips clock-for-clock, maybe even performance-per-watt...
I'm still enjoying the hell out of my on-die memory controller in my single core 939 3200+...
I'm not exactly CPU limited.

Hopefully there's some shaking and baking going on, fighting for the performance crown, between both AMD and Intel forever... That's always good for the consumer.


RE: Looks like...
By zsdersw on 5/22/2006 3:29:56 PM , Rating: 2
How am I worshiping at Intel's temple by suggesting that people put Conroe on their comparison shopping list? Obviously if one needs to upgrade their computer now, then do so.. but I'd wager that more people here are of the enthusiast variety, who likely don't really need the computing power they already have much less anything new from either Intel or AMD. As such, it would be prudent to wait just a little while longer to see what Conroe brings to the table.


RE: Looks like...
By Tyler 86 on 5/22/2006 3:50:14 PM , Rating: 2
I hope, when Conroe comes out, AMD's will try to saturate the market with much lower prices on their current chips.

The extreme enthusiast crowd with money bursting from their every orifice will no doubt buy the best of whomever is the best, but the mainstream will buy the cheapest most full-featured processor. 'Low' end dual-core 939 Athlon X2s 3800+ have that market segment nailed.
If they drop 6-20% in price, while "only" being outrun 5-20% clock-for-clock-to-price, they'll be the best value, and thus the best selling, processor.


RE: Looks like...
By zsdersw on 5/22/2006 4:05:32 PM , Rating: 2
The "mainstream" will buy whatever computer is on sale from Dell, HP, Gateway, or some other outfit.. and Intel stands as much to gain in clearing out "old" inventory as AMD does.


Moderated
By mickeymouse9 on 5/19/06, Rating: -1
RE: Looks like...
By trexpesto on 5/18/2006 7:48:38 PM , Rating: 2
Now if only big D would:
* sell without OS (AND without the cost)
* charge market rate for RAM upgrades


RE: Looks like...
By bigboxes on 5/19/2006 6:19:11 AM , Rating: 2
This is what is referred to as "builing it yourself".


RE: Looks like...
By bigboxes on 5/19/2006 6:19:49 AM , Rating: 3
"building it yourself" :)


RE: Looks like...
By miahallen on 5/19/2006 8:15:18 AM , Rating: 2
Yeah...and next someone's going to say, "Why can't they offer DFI or Asus mobos?" - duh!


RE: Looks like...
By Tyler 86 on 5/22/2006 3:15:42 PM , Rating: 2
Dell uses Asus and other manufacturers' motherboards, I think... I saw a graph a while ago showing the chain from retail in the US linking to them to China... one of which went USA Dell -> China ASUS...


RE: Looks like...
By creathir on 5/19/2006 4:33:38 PM , Rating: 1
As far as the OS goes... you can do this...
They give you Linux, or you can decide not to take anything...
- Creathir


RE: Looks like...
By Tyler 86 on 5/22/2006 3:17:09 PM , Rating: 2
Yeah that'd be nice. Dell AMD Linux Servers. Hell just dropped another degree celcius at the thought of that.


RE: Looks like...
By captchaos2 on 5/19/2006 8:25:37 AM , Rating: 2
Funny....I don't feel cold....


Moderated
By mickeymouse9 on 5/19/06, Rating: -1
Opteron is a TRUE server processor.
By MrKaz on 5/19/2006 5:26:28 AM , Rating: 2
I think that the big difference here is that Opteron is a TRUE Server Processor while Woodcrest is just a Conroe on a server chipset.




RE: Opteron is a TRUE server processor.
By zsdersw on 5/19/2006 7:01:44 AM , Rating: 2
Put the crack pipe down for a minute. Perhaps you're not aware how idiotic that statement was. Opteron and A64 are not as different as you make them out to be. There isn't anything more substantially different between Opteron and A64 than there is between Conroe and Woodcrest.. especially to pronounce one as being "a TRUE server processor".


RE: Opteron is a TRUE server processor.
By MrKaz on 5/19/2006 7:34:28 AM , Rating: 2
The only TRUE server processor for multi processor systems… I think that is what Dell is looking for at AMD. And what Dell will sell from AMD…


RE: Opteron is a TRUE server processor.
By Master Kenobi (blog) on 5/19/2006 7:44:48 AM , Rating: 2
If you really want to get technical, the only companies making TRUE server processors would be IBM and Intel. IBM has its own custom chips which can't be classed against mainstream offerings from Intel and AMD. Intel does however compete using the Itanium line. For the AMD fanboys out there, both IBM and/or Itanium from Intel will kick the crap out of an Opteron regardless of how many chips you stick together. Next time you wanna talk about TRUE server processors, do your homework.


By bob661 on 5/19/2006 6:09:20 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
ext time you wanna talk about TRUE server processors, do your homework.
The next time I need a dick extension, I'll come see you. Thanks bud for the hook up.


By LuxFestinus on 5/22/2006 3:32:05 PM , Rating: 2
The next time I need a dick extension, I'll come see you. Thanks bud for the hook up.

Go Go Gadget Epeen!


RE: Opteron is a TRUE server processor.
By zsdersw on 5/19/2006 8:19:44 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
The only TRUE server processor for multi processor systems


That's not what you said earlier. It's a completely different statement.. but unfortunately, it's completely false as well. As the poster above me said, there are other "TRUE server processors".. of which Itanium is one.


RE: Opteron is a TRUE server processor.
By Master Kenobi (blog) on 5/19/2006 8:43:30 AM , Rating: 1
I'll actually correct myself on my above post. Itanium from Intel, SPARC from Sun, and POWER from IBM are the 3 families of TRUE server CPU's. These are the ones you find in high end database and computational servers, the monsters that would eat any mainsteam server for breakfast.


RE: Opteron is a TRUE server processor.
By Griswold on 5/19/2006 1:10:22 PM , Rating: 1
Not quite that simple. Itanium wont eat anything for breakfast if it cant play out its number crunching card. And for the price of one such big iron, you can cluster any of the cheap x86 up the whazoo and get pretty much the same performance/dollar ratio.


RE: Opteron is a TRUE server processor.
By zsdersw on 5/19/2006 1:46:06 PM , Rating: 2
I was waiting for someone to start talking about Itanium's technical and price shortcomings.. for this reason: all of those issues are irrelevant to the issue at hand; what's "a TRUE server processor". Itanium is a true server processor.. period.


RE: Opteron is a TRUE server processor.
By bob661 on 5/19/2006 6:24:02 PM , Rating: 2
Can I find the definition of "a TRUE server processor" on wikipedia?


RE: Opteron is a TRUE server processor.
By zsdersw on 5/19/2006 7:02:49 PM , Rating: 2
Probably not, but I don't think that's the point.

Initially, MrKaz said that Opteron is "a TRUE server processor" and that Woodcrest is not. I pointed out how similar Opteron and A64 are.. and that the similarity is the same between Woodcrest and Conroe. Then MrKaz said something completely different.. that Opteron is the only "TRUE server processor" for multi-processor systems.. and then I (and someone else) pointed out how that was not a factual statement either.. by pointing to Itanium and other CPUs designed for multi-processor servers. Then Griswold brought up all the same old stuff about how Itanium isn't the greatest at this or the most cost effective at that; things that are entirely irrelevant of the fact that Itanium is "a TRUE server processor" designed for multi-processor systems.

The definition of "a TRUE server processor" is elementary. "TRUE server processors" and "TRUE server processors for multi-processor systems" are processors designed to go into servers and cooperate with other processors in the same system, among other things.


By MrKaz on 5/22/2006 5:05:18 AM , Rating: 2
Very good!


By ribbon13 on 5/31/2006 4:33:06 AM , Rating: 2
After you pull your foot out of your mouth look at #6

http://top500.org/lists/2005/11/basic



One problem
By Shining Arcanine on 5/18/06, Rating: 0
RE: One problem
By TomZ on 5/18/2006 5:51:12 PM , Rating: 2
You can't simply ignore the fact that people "want" to buy AMD-based servers right now, even if Intel had a superior product. It takes time for people to change their minds.


RE: One problem
By dgingeri on 5/18/2006 6:00:46 PM , Rating: 2
Intel's Woodcrest/Conroe/Merom has shown that it has superior power to the Athlon 64 X2 on desktops, for desktop apps.

There has been no proof that it is superior to the Opteron in server apps. The biggest advantage AMD has with the Opteron is it's on-chip memory controller. that gives a bigger performance advantage on server hardware than desktop hardware. It is more likely that the Opteron will still outperform, especially under multi-chip configurations, anything Intel has, especially considering the Woodcrest/Conroe/Merom will have a slower 667Mhz bus speed compared to the P4's 800/1066Mhz bus speed and the single bus for multiple chips. more than one Woodcrest on a bus still has to share the bus with the other chips, degrading any advantage multiple processor setups have. go to a quad socket server, and AMD will likely still have a 40%+ performance advantage.

This is likely why Dell has finally started to offer AMD Opteron based servers.

Me? I'll likely have to debate long and hard to decide of my next system wil be Intel or AMD, after not ever owning a P4 based system. I have used exclusively AMD processors in my systems since 1997. Conroe is the first good tech I've seen from Intel since the P3. PM/Core1 was decent and P4 was just bad.


Corrected Bus speeds
By smilingcrow on 5/19/2006 3:41:25 AM , Rating: 2
dgingeri stated: 'It is more likely that the Opteron will still outperform, especially under multi-chip configurations, anything Intel has, especially considering the Woodcrest/Conroe/Merom will have a slower 667Mhz bus speed compared to the P4's 800/1066Mhz bus speed and the single bus for multiple chips. more than one Woodcrest on a bus still has to share the bus with the other chips'

Merom = 667
Conroe = 1066
Woodcrest = 1333 (Dual Independent Bus)


RE: Corrected Bus speeds
By MrKaz on 5/19/2006 5:24:09 AM , Rating: 2
Woodcrest = 1333 (Dual Independent Bus)

Yes but I think is more like 667 (Dual Independent Bus) 2 x 667 (1333).
I think that’s enough.


RE: Corrected Bus speeds
By dgingeri on 5/19/2006 2:46:06 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Merom = 667
Conroe = 1066
Woodcrest = 1333 (Dual Independent Bus)


Well, not really. Conroe and Merom will both be 667 on the 945/955/975 chipsets, until the next chipsets come out at the end of 2006. Woodcrest will be 533 on the 975 chipset until the new chipsets come out in early 2007, then they will have the BID available. Even then, it will be both front side interfaces to one single dual channel DDR2-667 memory controller and one interface to the IO bus (PCI-Express/ PCI/ PCI-X).

in the mean time, AMD will have DDR2-800 to each processor and HT, which gives it major advantages. the only thing that could possibly allow Woodcrest to compete with the Opteron is if they give it 8MB of cache, which is not outside the realm of possibility. that will only give an advantage in certain areas. as a large DB, file, or print server, the Opteron would still pound anything Intel has until Intel starts seeing where their chips' limitations. As a web server or small BD server, it would be able to compete, if and only if they give it 8MB of cache. 4MB will simply not be enough to overcome the Opteron's memory bus advantage.


RE: Corrected Bus speeds
By zsdersw on 5/20/2006 7:45:27 AM , Rating: 2
Consider the following:

- The 965 chipset is said to be launching at the same time as Conroe.

- The 975 and 955 chipsets can already do 1066.. if they're going to support Conroe, which 975 certainly will at least.. they'll support Conroe at 1066.

- As far as I've seen, Woodcrest isn't intended for the 975 chipset and has been said by Intel to be 1333.


RE: Corrected Bus speeds
By Viditor on 5/28/2006 7:30:55 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
As far as I've seen, Woodcrest isn't intended for the 975 chipset and has been said by Intel to be 1333

To be more accurate, Woodcrest will be dual 667...
They will run at a 667 FSB, but each CPU will have it's own connection to the Northbridge...hence 1333.


RE: One problem
By defter on 5/19/2006 3:44:21 AM , Rating: 2
So many errors here....

1. Woodcrest will have 1333MHz FSB, which is faster than current 800/1066MHz FSB of Pentium chips.

2. There will be only one Woodcrest per bus in SMP configurations. Woodcrest CPUs WILL NOT share FSB.


quote:
go to a quad socket server, and AMD will likely still have a 40%+ performance advantage.


??? What does Woodcrest has to do with quad socket servers? Woodcrest based XeonMP will arrive only in the second half of 2007. Before that only Netburst based chips are available in XeonMP market. THIS is the reason why Dell has chosen Opteron for 4 socket servers, there simply won't be any NGMA based solutions anytime soon.

If you would have read the press release, you would noticed that Dell is planning to use Woodcrest in its server. This means that Dell will have:
- Intel only laptops
- Intel only desktops
- Intel only 1-2P servers and workstations
- AMD only >=4P servers


RE: One problem
By Viditor on 5/19/2006 8:52:01 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Woodcrest CPUs WILL NOT share FSB

Huh? If you are referring to the Bensley platform, it uses seperate buses to the MCH (Northbridge), but they share the connection to memory and must still go through the Northbridge for cache coherency in 2P. So yes, they do share the FSB (though the connections to it are seperate...).
This is why Intel will probably not be able to compete with Opteron in the 4P space until CSI is released in 2008/9...


RE: One problem
By redbone75 on 5/19/2006 3:39:29 AM , Rating: 2
Yeah, so people want to buy AMD processors right now. It will be really easy to change their minds if Intel's Woodcrest outperforms Opteron signifcantly and if they haven't invested in new servers yet.


RE: One problem
By bob661 on 5/19/2006 11:10:23 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
t takes time for people to change their minds.
Especially in the enterprise market where these machines are going to be used. Opterons have proven themselves to be superior in the server space. It will take a while for that same group to see an advantage to going back to Intel. The desktop market is TOTALLY different.


RE: One problem
By hstewarth on 5/19/2006 8:12:55 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
You can't simply ignore the fact that people "want" to buy AMD-based servers right now, even if Intel had a superior product. It takes time for people to change their minds


Actually they do look at my comment below. The problem with this logic is that AMD Fans desire Dell not to sell any of Intel chips

Maybe they want AMD based server now, but not in a month - I just notice benchmarks of Woodcrest 3Ghz dual cpu server out performaning AMD 4 cpu servers. I would not doubt that Intel will have there MP chips of this technology ready in 6 to so months. Intel has been kick around by AMD fans with the Netburst - one thing - Woodcrest is not NetBurst and things will seriously change.


Keep it rollin'
By breethon on 5/18/2006 5:42:44 PM , Rating: 2
Now just bring it down to their Notebooks and Desktop PCs and you got me!




RE: Keep it rollin'
By zsdersw on 5/18/2006 6:49:23 PM , Rating: 2
And what possible incentive would they have for doing that. Dell builds pretty lackluster PCs with Intel chips in them... what makes you think they'll build anything better with an AMD chip in it?


RE: Keep it rollin'
By stephenbrooks on 5/18/2006 7:37:54 PM , Rating: 2
They may be lacklustre, but the point is that they are *cheap*.


RE: Keep it rollin'
By zsdersw on 5/19/2006 6:56:36 AM , Rating: 2
They likely wouldn't be as cheap in terms of cost with an AMD chip in them.


RE: Keep it rollin'
By Viditor on 5/19/2006 10:58:07 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
They likely wouldn't be as cheap in terms of cost with an AMD chip in them

Why do you say that? For HP, with the identical systems except for the CPU, the AMD systems are less expensive...


RE: Keep it rollin'
By zsdersw on 5/19/2006 1:41:18 PM , Rating: 2
Yeah, that's HP. I'm talking about Dell.


RE: Keep it rollin'
By breethon on 5/19/2006 5:54:38 PM , Rating: 2
Oh yeah, I forgot Dell is a really small company with no bargaining power. Just like Walmart right? Go to HP.com and check prices for yourself. I am sure Dell might be able to "work something out". What are you an Intel Fanboy? I have always wanted to say that. I do like the Pentium Ds :) By the way, cool your jets, I was just kiddin about the fanboy thing :)


RE: Keep it trollin'
By bob661 on 5/19/2006 6:14:04 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
By the way, cool your jets, I was just kiddin about the fanboy thing
Don't apologize. If you're gonna flame, do it with authority!


RE: Keep it rollin'
By zsdersw on 5/19/2006 6:50:56 PM , Rating: 2
Supply and demand. In order to sell AMD-based PCs cheaper than Intel-based PCs.. Dell has to be able to get the AMD chips and motherboards cheaper than they get Intel chips and motherboards. There's no reason to assume they'll be able to do that.


RE: Keep it rollin'
By Viditor on 5/19/2006 8:21:10 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
There's no reason to assume they'll be able to do that

There's no reason to assume they won't, either...


RE: Keep it rollin'
By zsdersw on 5/19/2006 10:33:31 PM , Rating: 2
Sure there is. It's unlikely Dell will get from AMD the deals they get from Intel.


Finally
By proamerica on 5/18/2006 5:34:12 PM , Rating: 2
Now, sit back and watch the stock soar!!




RE: Finally
By boobot on 5/19/2006 8:58:46 AM , Rating: 2
Not going to happen, only quick short term. Dell still has low profit margin issues and this change is just for thier server line


RE: Finally
By poohbear on 5/19/2006 9:11:52 AM , Rating: 2
but isnt it a sign of things to come? i imagine its just a matter of time b4 we see desktop amd rigs.


RE: Finally
By zsdersw on 5/20/2006 3:10:18 PM , Rating: 2
Don't hold your breath on that.


RE: Finally
By Tyler 86 on 5/22/2006 3:19:18 PM , Rating: 2
Actually, hold your breath. That'd be fun to watch.

Now, seriously, metaphorically speaking, I think it's safe to hold your breath. They're going to be pushing AMD down all their branches due to, huzzah, a free market.


RE: Finally
By zsdersw on 5/22/2006 3:31:33 PM , Rating: 2
Not likely, at this point.


RE: Finally
By Tyler 86 on 5/22/2006 3:54:03 PM , Rating: 2
Can you point to a reason why it is not likely?

If AMD sells their processors with 'deals' in bulk the way it used to, and judging by their outlets selling the desktop processors, you bet your ass there'll be a few more AMD Dell lines than 'just' servers.


RE: Finally
By zsdersw on 5/22/2006 4:07:03 PM , Rating: 2
The deals won't be as sweet as the ones it gets from Intel.. and AMD doesn't have the capacity Dell requires. They will.. but not right now.


RE: Finally
By Viditor on 5/28/2006 7:26:53 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
AMD doesn't have the capacity Dell requires

I don't think that's true at all anymore...a year ago it was, but not anymore.


Why Now?
By ViRGE on 5/18/2006 5:38:07 PM , Rating: 2
Intel has its Conroe-based processors finally coming out this year for servers/desktops, and we've all seen the preliminary numbers for Conroe vs. K8. So why would Dell pick now to use Opterons, it seems a bit late.




RE: Why Now?
By cnimativ on 5/18/2006 5:41:56 PM , Rating: 1
Only for high end servers, where Intel lacks the bus bandwidth compare to Hyper Transport. The fix is not immediate for Intel.

No words yet for mid/low range server and desktop & notebooks.

Dell did say they are excited about Woodcrest/Merom/Conroe.


RE: Why Now?
By NoNoBadDog on 5/18/2006 8:28:15 PM , Rating: 2
Let's see...

Better TDP.
Cheaper.
The K8L Opeteron ouperforms the Conroe.
True dual core.
On-Die memory controller.
Hypertransport 3.0

I think that esplains it.

Intel...eat AMD's dust!

Bobby


RE: Why Now?
By ShapeGSX on 5/18/2006 8:48:01 PM , Rating: 2
>The K8L Opeteron ouperforms the Conroe.

K8L engineering samples don't even exist yet.

> True dual core.

Core Duo and Core 2 Duo are "true" dual core.

> Cheaper.

These days, I've seen Intel coming out with cheaper processors than AMD.

Yeah, "why now?"


RE: Why Now?
By Regs on 5/19/2006 8:37:06 AM , Rating: 2
Pure arrogance with that question. Lets just say this -- it would be like putting a 3 year prior comatose train wreck victim in complete charge of server design the day he wakes up.

Were is core duo? I haven't personally seen it either. Have you?


RE: Why Now?
By zsdersw on 5/19/2006 1:38:29 PM , Rating: 2
Core Duo has been out for a while.. it's featured most prominently in laptops.


RE: Why Now?
By User1001 on 5/20/2006 6:52:33 PM , Rating: 2
I think he meant core 2 duo


RE: Why Now?
By zsdersw on 5/20/2006 7:36:34 PM , Rating: 2
Then he should've clarified.


RE: Why Now?
By Tyler 86 on 5/22/2006 3:21:38 PM , Rating: 2
Core 2 Duo is coming. It will be nice. There may or may not be something nicer.

With the die shrink, maybe AMD can offer better quality processors, that outperform their Conroe counterparts, for less money, dispite their lower clock-for-clock.

Then again, Intel is holding the manufacturing capacity crown, still.


Pragmatism
By smilingcrow on 5/19/2006 2:55:02 PM , Rating: 2
Pragmatism rules and Dell’s recent performance doesn’t allow them to remain so aloof from market forces. No matter that Woodcrest looks great, K8L looks stunning.




RE: Pragmatism
By zsdersw on 5/19/2006 2:59:35 PM , Rating: 2
Woodcrest looking great isn't a "no matter" situation.


RE: Pragmatism
By smilingcrow on 5/19/2006 4:16:41 PM , Rating: 2
Quote by zsdersw: 'Woodcrest looking great isn't a "no matter" situation.'

I agrees that it does matter at 2P where it's competitive, but at 4P+ Opteron, especially K8L, will kill Woodcrest. That matters.
My fault for not making that clear. I assume too much in thinking that people know this stuff; you probably have a life :(


RE: Pragmatism
By zsdersw on 5/19/2006 7:14:33 PM , Rating: 2
And your running streak of assuming too much appears to be continuing unabated, as you've assumed I did not know about Opteron's advantages in 4P+ servers. I certainly do know about that.. but anyway..

Let's look at this logically:

- The current Opterons enjoy an advantage over Xeons in 4P+ environments.

- Woodcrest's advantages over current Opterons and other K8 chips, if true to their demonstrations from Intel, are significant, which would likely translate into a closing of the gap in the 4P+ space (although not as much of an improvement compared to single and 2P systems).

- K8L (like K8) already has an advantage right out of the gate in 4P+ systems because of HT. K8L, itself, will likely bring the Opteron/A64 on par with Woodcrest/Conroe.

- The advantage in 4P+ systems for Opteron is still largely a function of HT and the improvements made to it.

- The conclusion: Nothing really new... Opterons will continue to have an advantage in 4P+ systems, but not really because of the changes to the K8 (K8L), but because of HT.


RE: Pragmatism
By Tyler 86 on 5/22/2006 3:39:37 PM , Rating: 2
From a developers perspective, K8L looks more interesting and usable than Woodcrest.

Then again, I had high hopes for the PS3's IBM Cell, before it they broke all their promises, and gimped the hell out of it.

Here's hoping.


RE: Pragmatism
By zsdersw on 5/22/2006 4:11:07 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
From a developers perspective, K8L looks more interesting and usable than Woodcrest.


From your perspective as a developer or a broad concensus among developers? If the latter, where's your proof?


RE: Pragmatism
By Tyler 86 on 5/23/2006 4:21:10 PM , Rating: 2
From *my* personal perspective as a software developer, based on profiling of current applications, and realizing how much more I could do with what the K8L offers, in comparison to Intel's offers.

I can do a lot with both, but K8L is one of those 'fantasy' designs, where more capability is in the assembly of the application, not merely left up to the optimizing translation to RISC the likes of current x86 processors.
It is of the likes of the IBM Cell... 'fantasy' is an accurate description.

If it brings to market what it promises, that'll be fantastic. If Intel has something better up it's sleve, that'd be even more amazing.

6 month development cycles on processors once-upon-a-time were the talk of madmen, and only madmen had such fantasies as 32 pipe graphics cards, and dedicated physics processors...

But they've come and gone, and now we're looking towards the next generation around 64 pipe graphics cards, 4 core 64-bit extended processors with more registers, more out-of-order syncrhonous back-end capability, 1-cycle SIMD instructions... Fantastic indeed.


Do really believe AMD folks will buy Dell servers
By hstewarth on 5/19/2006 3:49:36 PM , Rating: 2
The Only reason why AMD fans are presuring Dell to include AMD processors is because they use Intel processors.

True AMD people will not buy the products from Dell but instead find it else where. The hope here is that people thinking of buying Dell may consider AMD products instead which adds to the AMD Based.

It is really silly this is coming out before Woodcrest is release, because once its out - its no longer an issue. Woodcrest will likely be the leader until 2007.

By the way this doesn't really hurt Dell or Intel, basically the people who are considering a Dell with Intel chip - would have got one anyway. Possible it adds Dell sales for ones that desired AMD Server chips but desired Dell systems.

In the long run, I believe helps Dell and AMD but doesn't hurt Intel.




By hstewarth on 5/19/2006 4:07:42 PM , Rating: 2
Also I don't see the big deal - Dell has been Selling AMD products - check out the following link...

http://accessories.us.dell.com/sna/productdetail.a...


By UltraWide on 5/19/2006 10:14:17 PM , Rating: 2
I don't see why they decided to carry AMD now. They have been sticking with intel during the hard times and now Intel will have very competitive products in the next few weeks and I am sure in 12 months Intel CPUs will once again be very competitive to AMD in the server arena.


By hstewarth on 5/19/2006 10:27:24 PM , Rating: 2
Actually Dell has been selling AMD chips for a while, its just these articles were timed to take advantage of the situation.

A lot less than 12 Months.. lets say a month or two.

http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=31836

If these are correct, not very good source of information - full of bad rumers - but if correct. A dual 3Ghz Woodcrest would like be faster than a 4 Cpu AMD server chip. And a low less power, 3Ghz woodcrest are only 65watts - likely 1/2 of power of AMD Server chips.



By maevinj on 5/20/2006 1:10:29 AM , Rating: 2
hstewarth:
do you work for intel or just a hard core fan boy? because every comment you make is always about the "new" intel chips killing amd chips. Thats like me saying my new nvidia 8800gtxxl card will be an ati x1900xl. Fact is the "new" intel chips aren't out yet. When they come out lets see some benches and then we can judge how awesome they are. Thanks


By Viditor on 5/20/2006 3:28:47 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
If these are correct, not very good source of information - full of bad rumers - but if correct. A dual 3Ghz Woodcrest would like be faster than a 4 Cpu AMD server chip

Your first instinct is correct...it's both innacurate and just plain wrong.
It examines the cores themselves without any busses or connections, and even then he makes mistakes...