Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Dell Rejects AMD Chips (again)

Zonk posted more than 9 years ago | from the intel-offers-them-cookies dept.

AMD 353

LarsWestergren writes "A few months ago Slashdot reported that Dell was considering using AMD for server CPUs, but most people rightly remained sceptical since Dell has announced this several times before and always backed out. Well, according to the Register you were right to be sceptical." From the article: "Dell, however, doesn't seem concerned by these pricing issues or the fact that Opteron outperforms Xeon on numerous benchmarks. 'We believe that Intel has responded,' Rollins said in the wire report. 'That is now beginning to put customers more at ease that they don't need to make a shift (to AMD).'"

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

BRING BACK MICHAEL! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11789188)

Michael sims was the BEST editor, we should re-hire him.

Bizarro world? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11789303)

I don't know what to make of this.

You got modded down for defending Michael.

What is this? A bizarro-world?

Apparently, changing chip vendors is too much work (4, Funny)

ABeowulfCluster (854634) | more than 9 years ago | (#11789193)

They'd have to actually track which chip goes in which board.

Re:Apparently, changing chip vendors is too much w (4, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11789228)

maybe dell has used amd to leverage a better deal from intel. we've seen the same thing happen with linux/open source and microsoft. organisations announce they are considering the former until microsoft jumps in with massive price reductions.

first post (nt) (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11789197)

first amd post

Yeah, So What... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11789200)

If you don't want an Intel processor, don't get a Dell (dude) then. You have options.

Well (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11789202)

If Dell doesn't want to switch to a better product then the question then becomes "why not switch away from Dell?"

Please explain "better product". (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11789367)

Explain, in technical terms, just how one processor is "better" than another. I do not accept annecdotal evidence. This explanation must also accompany a long term projection of cost savings over the life of the product. There should also be a justification for switch factor that states, in car terms, if the speed limit for most consumers is 55-65 mph, just why it is important to drive a Ferrari on the standard business highway.

Prick.

Re:Please explain "better product". (4, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11789458)

How about one CPU being at least as 'fast' (in real world terms) as another mfger's CPU even though running at a lower clocks speed, and running significantly cooler and using a lot less power? AND it's less expensive than that rival mfger's CPU. Oh and it's 64 bit as opposed to the other mfger's CPU which is 32 bit.

Yes, you are a prick.

Re:Please explain "better product". (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11789492)

The fact that it dissipates less heat is relevant.
Nobody gives a shit that it runs at a lower clockspeed.
Nobody gives a shit that it uses very slightly less power.
And the fact it runs in 64-bit mode is totally fucking irrelevant if you're running Windows (like just about all of Dell's customers).

You dumbass.

especially for a commodity like rackservers (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11789427)

Engineering/supporting these things isn't rocket science. There really is no benefit to paying 2-3 times the going rate just to get the same on-site support tech that the little guys would contract to fix your broken system.

Got an annoying relative that will constantly badger you for tech support? Send THOSE customers to DELL. They get their money's worth on the support end and you avoid all the support hassles. :-)

Re:Well (5, Funny)

Qzukk (229616) | more than 9 years ago | (#11789450)

Well, as the other coward pointed out, you need to justify it. In triplicate. With change control forms sent out at least a year in advance citing exactly what make and model hardware you're going to buy, why you're going to make the switch, and how much this change will increase the stock price (to the quarter-point). Once the change control has been reviewed and rejected twice, the boss's brother's daughter's husband's nephew's wife's niece's brother-in-law will suggest the same thing, at which point he'll be promoted and the change control will be accepted "for review" at which point you'll need to purchase the new equipment out of your own budget ("sorry, we can't requisition new equipment for you until the change control process is complete") after which you will need to document in entirety the process of setting up and installing the kit, along with months of testing to prove that the applications will even run on this "AMD Thingy", then ensure that the applications will not crash on this "completely unknown" architecture. Then, two years later, you will have completed the change control process and your AMD computers will be put into production (being, a model from two years ago). And when your boss's wife's father's second cousin's child's sister-in-law's (who doesn't even work at this company!) computer BSoD's, your head will roll!

Logical (1, Troll)

MarkRose (820682) | more than 9 years ago | (#11789205)

So another large PC manufacturer remains with dellinquent chips. Wait a minute -- that kinda makes sense.

Re:Logical (0, Flamebait)

jLewis42 (861944) | more than 9 years ago | (#11789242)

It's Dell. They make inferior computers for people who don't know anything beyond how to turn it on. Their customers probably think Intel is better becuase they have more name recognition. Besides, how many of the ignorant masses would know the difference.

Re:Logical (5, Funny)

sosegumu (696957) | more than 9 years ago | (#11789311)

It's Dell. They make inferior computers for people who don't know anything beyond how to turn it on.

A recent exchange:

Customer: Wow, that system your company built for us seems much faster than the other one we have--and it was even less expensive. Was there some sort of mistake?

Me: No mistake. It's because we only use AMD Athlon 64 processors in the computers we build. Your Dimension has an Intel Pentium processor which isn't nearly as fast and costs much more.

Customer: What? How can that be? Are you saying that you produce a better system for less money.

Me: Yep.

Customer (indignantly): Your system can't be faster than the Dimension--it's a Dell.

Me: ...Sigh...

Re:Logical (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11789369)

Actually I highly doubt that Dell is paying less for their Intel CPUs that you are paying for your AMD ones. What you should have said is: Dell gets a decent profit margin on their hardware and I don't!!

Also, I highly doubt that a customer would notice the speed difference between a Intel vs AMD system since it's usually down to a few percentage points either way.

Dell will never use AMD (5, Interesting)

rudy_wayne (414635) | more than 9 years ago | (#11789211)


In the '80s Intel sued AMD, twice, for producing 80386 compatible chips. The second time was for trademark infringement, essentially claiming that Intel owned the number '386'. One of the people testifying on behalf of Intel was Michael Dell.

Re:Dell will never use AMD (1, Informative)

xeon4life (668430) | more than 9 years ago | (#11789258)

Well, three, eight, and six consecutively is a pretty distinct pattern. I don't know about you tin-foil hatters out there, but '386' is unique enough to claim as a trademark.

If you used three numbers to identify a major product of yours, wouldn't you be a little peeved if someone else was using it too?

Re:Dell will never use AMD (1)

yem (170316) | more than 9 years ago | (#11789286)

He's not saying the trademark is without merit. He's saying Mr Dell is deep in Intel's pocket, and wont be cooperating with AMD any time soon.

Re:Dell will never use AMD (1)

daremonai (859175) | more than 9 years ago | (#11789313)

Well, three, eight, and six consecutively is a pretty distinct pattern. I don't know about you tin-foil hatters out there, but '386' is unique enough to claim as a trademark.
Uh, no, it's not. The decision was that you couldn't trademark a number. That's why Intel went with "Pentium" rather than "586."

Re:Dell will never use AMD (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11789402)

Yes, there are tons of crappy metal bands out there that I am pissed about right now.

Sincerely,
Satan

Re:Dell will never use AMD (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11789277)

Ever wonder how Google got away with trademarking "google" when Intel couldn't trademark "386"?

Re:Dell will never use AMD (1)

Johnathon_Dough (719310) | more than 9 years ago | (#11789315)

I'll bite.

Because Google the company spells it's name different than googol the number.

from Google: 1 googol = 1.0 × 10 to the 100 power [google.com]

Re:Dell will never use AMD (1)

mattdm (1931) | more than 9 years ago | (#11789417)

That's not even necessary. (Look at Microsoft's trademark on "Windows", for example!)

Trademarks based on real words are in general harder to defend, and trademarks that *are* real words even harder, but there's certainly millions of them.

Re:Dell will never use AMD (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11789370)

386 was not a trademark for Intel. It was a part number. The court ruled that part numbers could not be trademarked.

You can trademark words, so long as they are not in common use in the field that you are trademarking them for. Evidence, Mustang and Pinto.

Re:Dell will never use AMD (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11789394)

Intel did actually attempt to trademark "i386" and "i486". In fact they might have gotten away with it, but the courts found they couldn't sue people for using "386" and "486".

Re:Dell will never use AMD (1)

Billly Gates (198444) | more than 9 years ago | (#11789356)

Does Intel own Dell stock or vice versa?

This is looking kind of fishy if you ask me and strange. Sure a company has the right to ship whichever chips its wants but it surely does not make business sense right now for Dell.

Price conscience IT departments wont like the price for a SMP Xeon server compared to an SMP Opteron.

Dell is back to their old trick... (4, Insightful)

Krankheit (830769) | more than 9 years ago | (#11789212)

They get Intel jealous by flirting with AMD and when Intels reluctantly lowers their price Dell goes back to Intel. It is likely that they would do to Microsoft with Linux or *BSD to get the price of Windows down.

Re:Dell is back to their old trick... (1)

ravenspear (756059) | more than 9 years ago | (#11789271)

It is likely that they would do to Microsoft with Linux or *BSD to get the price of Windows down.

I don't think so. You can't compare those two situations. That trick would never work with M$ because M$ knows that Dell could never dump them. The average computer buyer problably isn't going to care if they order a new computer from Dell and they are told that the chip it has is from AMD because Dell decided they were better than Intel. However, the average buyer will most definitely NOT tolerate Dell telling them that they can only order a computer with Linux because Dell decided it was better than Windows. If Dell wants to remain the number one vendor it has no choice but to offer Windows, therefore it will pay whatever price M$ demands.

Re:Dell is back to their old trick... (1)

mattyrobinson69 (751521) | more than 9 years ago | (#11789435)

i dunno - if they said to the customer "we dont use windows anymore - its crap, this is much better", the _average_ customer would just assume the dell guy is right because they dont have a clue (never heard of linux). Linux is a bit of a buzzword nowadays, so if he has heard of it, he'd act knowlegable and say "does it support xml" or something equally stupid.

there'd be hell to pay when he got home and couldn't install his porn dialers though.

Re:Dell is back to their old trick... (1)

One of the abnormals (817423) | more than 9 years ago | (#11789295)

Actually, probably not. While the end user wouldn't notice a major difference if Dell used AMD chips, they certinly would notice if Dell stopped using Windows. Most end users dont care about what goes into their boxes, but what they see on the screen is what counts.

Re:Dell is back to their old trick... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11789335)

Linux is significantly more expensive for Dell to support than Windows, so that's not going to happen any time soon.

Plus, per the anti-trust settlement, Microsoft has to have a standard price sheet for Windows and can't give any OEM any special deals.

There's nothing stopping Dell from shipping Linux RIGHT NOW, but they choose to ship bare systems instead because Linux is just too expensive for the consumer/soho market.

Re:Dell is back to their old trick... (4, Interesting)

bdsesq (515351) | more than 9 years ago | (#11789426)

Its not quite that simple. Look at what Dvorak says in his latest column--- Intel has been essentially paying OEMs not to use AMD chips.
You can read the rest at http://www.pbs.org/cringely/pulpit/pulpit20050224. html [pbs.org]
Its about half way down the page.

In other words... (2, Interesting)

jmcmunn (307798) | more than 9 years ago | (#11789213)


Dell found cheaper prices for Intel boards/processors and whatnot, and can keep their bargain basement prices without switching vendors. All this means is that they can keep winning the price wars without switching...

Side note:
Oh and anyone who still needs a Gmail account...feel free to drop by my page. I have over 600 of them posted. Free for the taking...

http://www.jiggybyte.com/gmail [jiggybyte.com]

Enjoy...

Re:In other words... (0, Offtopic)

WoodieR (860635) | more than 9 years ago | (#11789330)

Thanx for the gmail !!!!!! Cheers Richard

Re:In other words... (4, Insightful)

TopShelf (92521) | more than 9 years ago | (#11789338)

Don't forget also that the key to Dell's performance is it's supply chain performance, which relies on just-in-time deliveries and vendor-managed inventory. It would be a huge operational risk to switch vendors like that, so AMD would have to provide more than just a better processor to win that business.

Re:In other words... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11789357)

This is a very valid point that should be moderated up.

Intel supplies the processor, chipset, and motherboard, and can likely JIT ship the whole thing to Dell as a pre-assembled unit. Doing the same thing in the AMD would would require coordinating 3 different vendors.

Translation (4, Funny)

Jameth (664111) | more than 9 years ago | (#11789214)

"That is now beginning to put customers more at ease that they don't need to make a shift (to AMD)."

- or -

We are Intel's customer, and now that they gave us a dumptruck full of money, we are quite at ease.

this whole thing reaks... (0, Redundant)

zonker (1158) | more than 9 years ago | (#11789215)

i have a feeling this whole thing was about dell trying to get a better deal on chips from intel by threatening to start buying some amd. same old crap...

HAHA (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11789219)

First Microsoft will only allow re-installs/product activation of XP via phone support, now Dell won't use AMD's incredible processors. Let Dell and Microsoft both fade into irrelevancy. Christmas in February! I love it.

Why? (1)

hot_Karls_bad_cavern (759797) | more than 9 years ago | (#11789220)

If this was for a technical reason, i guess i'm wondering what that reason was (mainly because i only run AMD at home and would really like to know).

Anyone know why? Or did Intel stop by and mention something special is in the works?

Re:Why? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11789259)

Yeah, something special is in the works.. more expensive products.
I once had a manager who knows nothing about computing refuse a MUCH better opteron server because it was cheaper than intel. Go figure..

Re:Why? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11789282)

In the past, there were technical concerns about chipset drivers for AMD systems -- especially in larger enterprises where they manage 1000s of machines. With a few minor exceptions, Intel machines Just Work(tm) without many driver issues.

so its *not* a dupe..... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11789221)

they should use that "(again)" in the headline more often..

Making a Shift... (1)

Tavor (845700) | more than 9 years ago | (#11789223)

to AMD? What is Dell smoking? Shifting from Intel to AMD isn't a big deal. It's still x86-based. Now, shifting from AMD (or Intel) to Apple would be something that might make you customers nervous if you were Dell. But then again, that's never going to happen either. Dell's just going to sit around and be the Wintel hench-OEM. Is it any wonder that some people have given them the moniker "Dull"?

You know.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11789224)

this is sort of like when someone buys a Lexus ES instead of a Toyota Camry, except this time the AMD outperforms the Intel. Does AMD really have that sh!tty a name that people are willing to pay more for an inferior product and the intel inside label?

When you buy Dell you're buying a name (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11789241)

Dell at this point is entirely based on the business model of being the least alarming name out there. As a result, the companies they choose as vendors are the ones with the least alarming name. When you pay for a Dell you aren't playing for a functional computer, you're paying for the promise that there will be nothing exceptional about your computer whatsoever. This is what people want. Exceptional things are risky and scary.

Re:When you buy Dell you're buying a name (1)

disposable60 (735022) | more than 9 years ago | (#11789471)

That was exceptionally well said.

Re:You know.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11789266)

Nope. AMD doesn't:

- Have anywhere near the manufacturing capabilites of Intel.
- Produce their own motherboard chipsets, and sell the set with an enormous discount.
- Produce sufficiently reliable processors (I work for an OEM, and the number of AMD's we send back is appalling).
- Have a well-known brand name that goes down well with PHBs.

Re:You know.... (1)

Nutria (679911) | more than 9 years ago | (#11789445)

- Have anywhere near the manufacturing capabilites of Intel.


This just as important to Dell as anything else.

This is news? (0, Flamebait)

jcr (53032) | more than 9 years ago | (#11789225)

Dell opts for mediocrity (again!), and it's a news story?

-jcr

Dell is a PHB favorite. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11789485)

Look at how many large organizations *only* buy Dell, no matter what. If Dell refuses to use AMD processors then those processors must be bad, and probably communist too, therefore Intel must be good, and probably owned by one of the President's relatives.

so (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11789226)

will it run MacOS X now?

What do you think? (1)

bestadvocate (816742) | more than 9 years ago | (#11789227)

"By sticking with Intel only, Dell is able to maintain the supplier simplicity that made it famous. It doesn't have to worry about AMD slip-ups or change its ordering systems to deal with new parts. Its allegiance to Intel no doubt also comes with pricing and marketing perks."

What do you think stays Dell's hand the most marketing perks or supplier simplicity?

Why would they switch to a cheaper chip? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11789233)

The more expensive the base chip is the more profit margin they get.

So what is their motivation, especially when they already own such a huge piece of the market?

Re:Why would they switch to a cheaper chip? (1)

Samari711 (521187) | more than 9 years ago | (#11789312)

Basic economics, you lower the price relying on more people to end up buying. Even though you might be making less money per unit if the conditions are right you'll be moving more units and making greater profit overall. That is all assuming profit is a % of the total cost and not a static amount tacked on to the end price.

I'm sure the bean counters went over every aspect of both scenarios and determined that sticking with Intel would yeild the most profit at the lowest risk.

Re:Why would they switch to a cheaper chip? (1)

ltbarcly (398259) | more than 9 years ago | (#11789433)

I think you mean highest profit OR lowest risk. Rarely in any financial situation will the highest profit be gained from taking the option with the least risk. In fact, the opposite is almost always the case. Of course, least risk doesn't even mean "lose the most money", it has to do with volatility also.

These things can be very complicated, this is *why* there are professional bean counters all over the place.

AMD is Dell's bargaining chip (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11789238)

Whenever Dell needs to negotiate with Intel, it will publicly make pro-AMD statements to leverage a better deal. Intel knows this but can't afford to call Dell's bluff.

Dell keeps AMD far, but not too far.

Customers are already making a shift. (4, Interesting)

BoomerSooner (308737) | more than 9 years ago | (#11789239)

I use AMD processors in some of my servers and am evaluating purcahsing a new rack full of hardware for migrating off our current servers (mix of AMD & Intel) that are tower based. Monarch Computers [monarchcomputer.com] (Linux Journal runs on them) is pretty reasonable but I'm also looking at the Sun [sun.com] offerings.

I like Dell computers reasonably well. However we have decided to go with AMD for multiple reasons. Unfortunately they don't offer what we are looking for and as a result have lost about a $30,000 purchase. Granted 30K is peanuts to them but over time it adds up, one customer here, one customer there.

Their slogan should be "Dell, providing what we say you need, not what you desire." Hell, even their linux offerings are a joke (workstation side).

I contacted Dell about a 750k rack server purchase (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11789365)

but told them that they absolutely needed to be opteron based (we do mostly processor bound simulations for a DOD client). The sales droid said they would take our specifications and get back to me. About a week later, I get a phone call saying that their wonderful 3.2ghz P4 solution was perfect for our application. So I politely thanked him for the call and bought the systems from another vendor.

Whatever Intel is doing for them, it must be pretty good...

Re:Customers are already making a shift. (1)

anandrajan (86137) | more than 9 years ago | (#11789387)

Monarch Computers (Linux Journal runs on them) is pretty reasonable but I'm also looking at the Sun offerings.

We evaluated quite a few vendors recently as well. When buying say a terabyte linux file server, make sure to get adequate cooling, good sturdy chassises etc. For example, Monarch would not let us pick a CIdesign chassis [cidesign.com] which has a good reputation, so we didn't go with them.

At the very least talk to Net Express [tdl.com] They are very knowledgable when it comes to putting together custom linux servers.
Disclaimer: I don't work for Net Express.

Get off the bandwagon and on with the future (1)

L0J46K (610782) | more than 9 years ago | (#11789249)

AMD has been creeping on Intel's market share since I can remember. Who in their right mind is going to spend the money on a Wintel server from Dell when they can put something serious together from other sources or all by themselves.

Why use an inferior product? There must be some serious kickback from Intel for Dell to lock themselves in.

Re:Get off the bandwagon and on with the future (2, Insightful)

discstickers (547062) | more than 9 years ago | (#11789273)

Because most people don't know it exists.

Re:Get off the bandwagon and on with the future (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11789301)

> AMD has been creeping on Intel's market share since I can remember.

This is only true if you memory only goes back 2 years. AMD's marketshare goes up and down, but generally stays below 20%.

Another loss for people... (1)

RichKyanka (837066) | more than 9 years ago | (#11789257)

... who love their CPU manufacturer too much. This news is news because it means that AMD still is stuck as #2. AMD cannot be #1 without Dell. I love it when stupid people who get emotional about their chipmaker get bad news.

All About the Pentiums, Baby (1)

Bendy Chief (633679) | more than 9 years ago | (#11789261)

It's all about the Pentiums! (It's all about the Pentiums, baby)

Now, what y'all wanna do?
Wanna be hackers? Code crackers? Slackers
Wastin' time with all the chatroom yakkers?
9 to 5, chillin' at Hewlett Packard?
What??

http://www.com-www.com/weirdal/itsallaboutthepen ti ums.html

Re:All About the Pentiums, Baby (2, Funny)

FidelCatsro (861135) | more than 9 years ago | (#11789375)

"What kind of chip you got in there a dorito "
I am sorry but dell only supply intel brand x86 procesors

Temperature Liability? (0)

grumpygrodyguy (603716) | more than 9 years ago | (#11789262)

I know the newer AMD chips run cooler than previous generations, but I wonder how large PC manufacturers like Dell percieve liability risks due to overheating when making decisions like these.

With some processors a cooling fan failure may just render the computer unuseable until the fan is replaced...in more extreme cases the CPU and mainboard will need replacing.

Re:Temperature Liability? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11789459)

All of AMD's reasonably recent offerings (read: anything from the past 2 years or so) runs cooler than Intel. So, Dell's liability is continuing to run Intel, and not the other way around.

Intel, Dell and AMD. (1)

Krankheit (830769) | more than 9 years ago | (#11789265)

Perhaps Intel processors are easier to support (overheating perhaps just makes an Intel chip slowdown or reset, and AMD chips become damaged?). But IMNSHO if Dell wants to keep their server market share, I think they should be using AMD. Italium isn't selling. Even if Intel did lose Dell as a customer for Pentium 4, it wouldn't hurt Intel much. Intel still has alot of other cool things like PCI Express to keep them going. I think in the future Intel will stop so much precedence on their CPUs and focus more on complimentary components like PCI Express.

Re:Intel, Dell and AMD. (1)

killa62 (828317) | more than 9 years ago | (#11789428)

Actually, Intel Chips Throttle, and amd chips throttle too.
List of procesors which throttle:
Anything after pentium 3
Anything after AMD 64

Monarch (1)

Noksagt (69097) | more than 9 years ago | (#11789280)

The boss usually likes to buy through Dell, as it is a name he trusts. I haven't minded, as fatwallet [fatwallet.com] has often pointed me to fantastic deals & I could look good by stretching the buck as far as it went.

We recently needed to get non-SMP machines which could address massive amounts of memory. Dell's anti-AMD stance made this exceedingly difficult. Instead, we ordered through Monarch [monarchcomputer.com] . They are fantastic! The prices are fair--not so cheap as build-your-own & not as cheap as the outrageous Dell deals that sometimes pop up, but very fair. They are also Linux-friendly & have excellent support. The boss was impressed with how far the buck stretched for top-of-the-line workstations (though Dell would be better for entry-level) & we've placed more orders through them.

Re-reading my own glowing review makes it seem a bit over the top, but I really have no other connection to Monarch aside from being an exceedingly happy customer. They're worth a try if you want AMD machines.

Re:Monarch (1)

Mishra100 (841814) | more than 9 years ago | (#11789372)

Thats neat. When I was researching my desktop computer I ended up finding monarch computers and bought my stuff from them. It will works great after years and their support was just fine. Everything was smooth. Of course this was only for one desktop but I thought I would comment.

Monarch has been good for me too. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11789447)

I've also had good results from a company called 8anet.com. They build whitebox systems and resell the prefab Supermicro stuff. Fast and dirt cheap.

This is fantastic news!!!! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11789289)

OMG I'm so overjoyed, ever since I first saw Blueman Group I decided to only buy what they advertise. Make mine Intel & Dell forever!!!!!

Huh? (2, Insightful)

AdityaG (842691) | more than 9 years ago | (#11789290)

Why is it that we always have these big companies that we simply rant on. Think. Dell is a company. They want to make money. People are buying their computers. Why would they bother switching? Even if switching to AMD would be cheaper, I don't see why everyone treats this as some big conspiracy. So Dell supports Intel. Is that wrong? They can do whatever the hell they want with their products and choose to support whatever companies.

Ah well... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11789310)

Who gives a Dell?

Why? (1)

dtfinch (661405) | more than 9 years ago | (#11789323)

With fewer choices, some potential customers will just look elsewhere (again).

AMD lacks high volume manufacturing capacity (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11789328)

First off, I love AMD and believe the Athlon and Opteron products are far and away superior products. They're way out in front for the scientific code that I write.

However, AMD has a serious problem: even if everyone suddenly decided to dump Intel and go with AMD, it couldn't be done. AMD just doesn't have the manufacturing capacity to churn out the volume necessary to completely displace Intel. That might be comforting to Intel, because they can pretty much do anything they want, i.e. churn out inferior, high priced product, for well into the future and not worry about losing significant market share. The only way for AMD to become the dominant processor manufacturer is to slowly and PROFITABLY chip away at Intel's share, and continue investing in new plants and partners (like IBM) to produce Athlons and Opterons. Unfortunately, AMD is still on rocky ground financially. Even as we speak, they are systematically closing down their chip fabs for one week stints as a cost saving measure. I want AMD to succeed, but it is going to be much harder than some fanboys think.

Re:AMD lacks high volume manufacturing capacity (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11789467)

I'm pretty sure AMD could have investors pony up the cash for new plants if everyone dumped Intel.

Easy for me (1, Insightful)

JamesP (688957) | more than 9 years ago | (#11789331)

One less vendor to consider...

If Dell wants to continue to sell crap, just let them... I'm not buying.

sceptical (0, Offtopic)

Bootle (816136) | more than 9 years ago | (#11789340)

how about this:

septical: of, or related to, a large underground container of poo poo

Behind times (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11789341)

So no 64bit for Dell. Dell is so yesterday. "No latest and gratest for our customers!"

*back to mom-pop shops*

AMD>

The Real Question Is... (0)

MHobbit (830388) | more than 9 years ago | (#11789342)

Why use a Dell server anyway? Why not build your own or get a colocated one at thePlanet?

Dell is falling (1, Insightful)

jack_canada (786305) | more than 9 years ago | (#11789346)

DELL isn't gonna stay in the desktop PC business too long if they don't change their strategies a bit. DELL machines and parts are way over-priced, customers are getting smarter and smarter. Those smart enough probably won't buy a DELL.

Re:Dell is falling (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11789430)

While I appreciate your anti-Dell fanboy-osity, I think you need a reality check. Smart people have not purchased Dell desktop computers in a long time. That's not who they're selling computers to. Dell's main market is businesses and non-technical people who don't really care what the latest benchmarks between AMD and Intel are. And those benchmarks are becoming less and less important everyday... how many people outside of gamers (who don't buy Dell anyway) care how fast their computers are? I'm typing on a 4-year old 800MHz Duron that's just fine.

As for their server business, Dell servers are generally considered to be in the low end, where value--not ultimate performance--matter. Dell probably has a pretty insane deal with Intel that actually makes their chips cheaper or similarly priced to AMD's. Factor in the cost of having to explain to their customers why to use AMD, and for Dell, it's a smart business decision. Dell is isn't dumb... they didn't become the largest PC manufacturer in the world by making stupid business decisions.

someone is getting paid big $$$ (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11789348)

Someone who makes the final decisions at Dell, maybe even Michael himself, is getting paid top dollars by Intel(and of course by Microsoft). This is the one and only one explanation that Dell keeps turning down AMD and trying to turn down the thousand of users who simply want to buy computers and not computers with illegally bundled Microsoft software.

The only good thing about Dell is that they are finally obeying the law and giving windows refunds if you ask for it.

In other news.. (-1)

khrtt (701691) | more than 9 years ago | (#11789362)

I reject Dell...again!

Does Dell make their own motherboards? (1)

Billly Gates (198444) | more than 9 years ago | (#11789371)

I can not figure out how this makes good business sense?

Dell was correct back in 1999 to turn down the Athlon due to instability issues with some early chipsets.

But today the chipsets (excluding VIA) are fairly reliable. Does serverworks have a chipset for the Opteron?

Maybe that could be the reason?

But AMD chips are now reliable and alot cheaper and could save Dell a ton of money. Especially this is true in the server arena.

Hot Deal on Dells (0, Offtopic)

gulfan (524955) | more than 9 years ago | (#11789373)

For those of you that live in Canada, or are interested in importing Dell Canada has a fantastic deal running right now on the Dimension 2400. For $299 plus tax the system features a Celeron 2.4GHz, 256MB RAM, Windows XP Home, and an 80GB hard drive. Considering that a full copy of XP would cost you $100 by itself, this is an awesome deal! Shipping is also included in the price. This would be a great deal for those of you who want to keep your children away from your main workstation.

Dell Deal [dell.com]

AMD stability history has something to do with it. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11789386)

What has AMD done to disprove the that current crop of processors don't suffer from the same stability issues the older AMD processors suffered from?

Duron was great, but I got burned with MP and XP on a few of occasions, on various mbs, and everytime nobody (mb manufacturer, amd, chipset manufacturer, etc) took the blame. Maybe if AMD would go into the mb business (since they already have a stable chipset compared to via, nvidia, ati), this stigma will slowly disappear.

Dell ability to keep prices down is directly related to the products' stability (less actual support required)

DELL sucks (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11789411)

Just go on pricewatch or so and you can build a much better and blazing fast AMD system for the same price as a regular DELL desktop. If you still want to buy a DELL make sure you demand your windows refund.

Is AMD capable of supplying enough chips? (2, Insightful)

Lemming Mark (849014) | more than 9 years ago | (#11789412)

Technical considerations aside, there are business reasons that could contribute to this decision. Aside from the issues of switching processor vendors, there's also the issue of production capacity.

Intel is a much larger company than AMD. I was under the impression that AMD doesn't (yet) have the production capacity to match Intel - could they actually manage to supply at the rate Dell might require? It's not in Dell's interests to go with a component it can't obtain in sufficient bulk, regardless of technical issues.

Customers not trusting AMD? (1)

jack_canada (786305) | more than 9 years ago | (#11789415)

Dell was saying that they decided not to use AMD chips because its customers don't trust the stability and performence of AMD chips.

It's not about quality (0)

johansalk (818687) | more than 9 years ago | (#11789425)

It's about volume; AMD only makes 3% of the processors and Intel makes 97% of them. Dell needs volume, a lot of it, and consistently. AMD probably can't meet the supply needs of dell, regardless of how better their processors are than Intel's.

Re:It's not about quality (1)

jack_canada (786305) | more than 9 years ago | (#11789442)

True but if they partner with Dell, they could expand their manufacturing. AMD makes good quality chips, but Intel is probably giving Dell benefits to try to persuade Dell to stay away from AMD?

DELL could be competitive (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11789449)

If Dell would sell their computers without that stupid windows crap or at least advertise the windows refund they could sell them for $150 less. That could make Dell almost competitive.

And this is why.... (1)

tweek (18111) | more than 9 years ago | (#11789454)

I didn't buy a dell the past christmas for my wife.

I went round and round trying to find a good vendor to provide an AMD64 machine for my wife to do her video and photo stuff on and I actually looked at Dell. I searched all over and found that they didn't sell a single AMD64 machine.

So I walked away.

I ended up spending around 3k for a machine with Monarch/NewEgg and did some of the assembly myself but my wife now has a computer that I won't have to upgrade for quite some time. That includes the 3 year warranty from Monarch.

I understand that Dell keeps costs inline by pulling an assembly line approach but this is going to bite them in the ass even more as people start demanding x86_64 and Dell can't come to market. EMT64 just doesn't cut it in my mind.

Hell even IBM is starting to introduce AMD64 in it's xSeries line.

In other news.. (1)

khrtt (701691) | more than 9 years ago | (#11789482)

I reject Dell...again!

In other words, Dell is a large company, and they can have a million corporate reasons not to use AMD chips - reasons that don't apply to me and you. Like, they can't source them fast enough, or they sell to stupid asshats who don't know about AMD, or AMD's president's third nephew screwed Dell's cousin's cousin's daughter. Why the heck do I care, unless they state their reasons? Also, I don't buy Dell computers because they are too expensive for what they are. I can get equivalent machines for less - quality, speed, support and all - from other vendors. If Dell is not competitive (for me as a customer, anyways) why should I care that they don't buy AMD CPUs?

AMD should... (2, Insightful)

zarthrag (650912) | more than 9 years ago | (#11789487)

...make anti-Dell remarks in public - and refuse to ever offer them a bargain. Then maybe Dell will stop trying to whore wintel for money.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?