×

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!

AMD 50% At Dell in 2007

Hemos posted more than 7 years ago | from the could-be-maybe dept.

75

A reader writes: "Reports from Taiwan chipmakers indicate that AMD may make a very large percentage of Dell's sales this year." AMD, of course, has made no comments in regard to this; but if the reports are correct, then it's another setback for Intel in the server market.

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

75 comments

20 Million of 55 Million (5, Funny)

eldavojohn (898314) | more than 7 years ago | (#16037338)

So there was no article but I found this [digitimes.com] online that I think I had caught on Digg once (can I say that here?).

Anyway, this all goes back to our friends IDC who have this knack for claiming to be the industry experts in everything. I don't really buy that but they make these reports and then the article gets published and Slashdot usually caries them. In the particular link above, they estimate that 55 million CPUs will be used by Dell in 2007 and that, according to Taiwanese chipmakers, 20 million of them will be AMD chips. So that comes to a little over a third, not half if those estimates are accurate.

Hemos, I know you're pissed because you have to edit Slashdot on labor day weekend but hang in there champ. You forgot a department on the last story and a link on this one but you'll get the next one right, I'm sure of it!

Re:20 Million of 55 Million (4, Funny)

niceone (992278) | more than 7 years ago | (#16037369)

that I think I had caught on Digg once (can I say that here?).

Not only can you say it, it's pretty much obligatory.

You forgot to complain about how late slashdot is these days though.

Re:20 Million of 55 Million (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16038925)

You forgot to complain about how late slashdot is these days though.

No worries. He will get that chance when the article is reposted.

Re:20 Million of 55 Million (1)

Jeff DeMaagd (2015) | more than 7 years ago | (#16037457)

Also, Digitimes isn't very good with predictions either. It is best to ignore whatever they print, regardless of who they say their sources are.

What Crack are they smokin there? (3, Interesting)

OS24Ever (245667) | more than 7 years ago | (#16037368)

I'm sure this number was yanked out of the ass of some analyst somewhere, but last I checked Woodcrest is still faster than Rev F for 98% of the applications out there. Intel is doing a full court press from a sales perspective with their teams out there and are going to introduce quad core by the end of the year.

What makes someone think Dell can flip 50% of it's business to AMD? The best way Dell can do anything is to drop the price. I don't think AMD is in the position to want to go into a price war just yet...

Re:What Crack are they smokin there? (3, Interesting)

smilindog2000 (907665) | more than 7 years ago | (#16037406)

Something pretty good! Do you guys keep getting the same Core Duo adds I get whenever I go to /.? They're working... I really want one.

I'm waiting to see AMD's 65nm product. Until then, I'm sitting on the side-lines. That's probably why AMD is keeping their progress hush-hush. Just in case you missed it before, here's some good rumors about AMD coming out this month with 65nm products:

http://www.fabtech.org/content/view/1757/2/ [fabtech.org]

Re:What Crack are they smokin there? (1)

ravenshrike (808508) | more than 7 years ago | (#16038191)

Fffuckkkkkkkkkkkk. Just when I was about to build my new computer. Fuck fuck fuck fuck. Ah well. given the limited availability I'll just go with Conroe.

Re:What Crack are they smokin there? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16037573)

98% of applications? Must be some good crack you are smoking. The people at Scalability.org [scalability.org] have been playing with it have have a few [scalability.org] articles [scalability.org] about [scalability.org] it [scalability.org]. They don't run Sisoft sandra and other faux benchmarks. Their focus is high performance scientific computing.

Re:What Crack are they smokin there? (0)

rf0 (159958) | more than 7 years ago | (#16037580)

Also depending on who the numbers ore fudged you could count the number of cores shipped to make things look even more impressive

Re:What Crack are they smokin there? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16037631)

I don't think AMD is in the position to want to go into a price war just yet...


Maybe that's why Dell took AMD, to eventually put them out of business so the only chip maker would be Intel. After that Micro$hit, Inhell, and Smell would all eliminate their competition by using the old 'We'll scratch your backs if you'll scratch ours' leading to a true monopoly on the computer field. I know about the anti-trust laws and all it would take is to give a bit money to $hrub and that fucktard along with the rest of the Libertarian/Republican Dog-Eat-Dog/Survival-of-the-fittest fucktards won't do diddly fucking squat about it.

Re:What Crack are they smokin there? (2, Informative)

chrisinsocalif (984172) | more than 7 years ago | (#16038365)

Here is a link thats shows the Woodcrest is only 2% faster than Opteron socket F. The article states Opteron is actually faster when you ramp up the amount of ram. Its possible Woodcrest will not be faster for 98% of the apps out there. AMD still has Rev. G (65nm) and the K8L that will help boost performance and could prove the better server processor. If this benchmark is a true representation of what AMD has to come, Dell is trying to jump on the bandwagon early. Hopefully more benchmarks will be released to reveal the truth. http://www.amdzone.com/index.php?name=PNphpBB2&fil e=viewtopic&t=9960&sid=a138aa30dbd209d5ae33d391116 6d72d [amdzone.com]

Re:What Crack are they smokin there? (1)

drinkypoo (153816) | more than 7 years ago | (#16039125)

Let's also not forget that the maximum RAM for Athlon systems is currently higher than any of the intel solutions, not least because of the ways you can interconnect Athlons.

Dell had to do something (5, Insightful)

LWATCDR (28044) | more than 7 years ago | (#16037375)

IBM, HP, and Sun are all beating Dell in the server market. They all offer two things that Dell doesn't
1. AMD servers.
2. A server upgrade path beyond the X86.
I think the last one is over looked. If you need big iron IBM can provide a Power based solution, Sun can upgrade you to an Ultrasparc based server, and even HP has the Integrity and Superdome lines.
The other thing that IBM, HP, and Sun offer is real Linux and Unix support. IBM is heavy into Linux now and still is actively developing AIX, Sun has Solaris and more than a few FOSS projects going on, and HP has good support for Linux and not one but Two versions of Unix.
The difference is Dell sells boxes, IBM, HP, and Sun are computer companies.

Re:Dell had to do something (1)

MtViewGuy (197597) | more than 7 years ago | (#16037395)

However, I expect Dell to be huge in the server market using Intel's new dual-core Xeon 5000 and 7000 series CPU's. Based on the same CPU core that made the Core Duo 2 CPU such a great CPU, the new Xeons will likely fight back successfully against AMD's Opteron CPU's.

Re:Dell had to do something (2, Interesting)

ZachPruckowski (918562) | more than 7 years ago | (#16037481)

Not really. Core 2 Duo is a boon on the desktop and laptop fronts, but beyond dual-socket servers, you're not getting much. I mean, at 4-way, 8-way, and n-way configs, Hypertransport allows AMD's offerings to be much more competitive. And when we move next year to 4-core chips squaring off against 4-core chips, bandwidth contention is gonna be a huge factor with Intel's MCMs and being on a 1333 MHz FSB for 4 cores.

Re:Dell had to do something (1)

htd2 (854946) | more than 7 years ago | (#16038569)

The chip rumour mill has CloverTown (4 way 5160 MCM) running slower FSB than 1333 MHz with cache snoop traffic going over FSB between the 2 Woodcrest modules that make up the CloverTown MCM.

Re:Dell had to do something (1)

ZachPruckowski (918562) | more than 7 years ago | (#16038716)

I haven't heard about a slower FSB - it's drop-in replacement on Xeon boards for the 50xx and 51xx series. But you're right in that the two 5160s on the MCM use the FSB to talk.

Re:Dell had to do something (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16039015)

Clovertown is a 2-way 4 core MCM. It works beautifully.

Re:Dell had to do something (1)

default luser (529332) | more than 7 years ago | (#16045382)

Yes, I've made posts about this before. The Dual-Independent Bus (DIB) architecture introduced by Intel has only solved the 4-core issue. With Covertown expected to clock in with a miserly 1066 MHz FSB, I expect performance to improve %50 or less when moving from 4->8 cores. 16 cores is still a pipe dream.

Meanwhile, AMD is preparing to launch the K8L. Not only will it feature many of the performance improvements seen in Core2, it will also feature a shared L3 cache and, most importantly, a 4th hypertransport link.

Now, the 4th hypertransport link doesn't sound like much, until you consider: with 3 hypertransport links, even AMD's 4-socket configurations have been a bit limited (you have to sacrifice single-hop latency between processors because they have to connect to external I/O). 8-socket systems were even worse, with several hops between processors.

The additional hypertransport link on K8L means optimal configuration for 4-socket (16 core) systems. The 4 16-bit hypertransport links on K8L can also be split into 8 8-bit interconnects, allowing for single-hop memory access on 8-socket (32 core) systems. Read this preview on Real World Tech [realworldtech.com] for more information.

If anyone wants to know why Dell is going gung-ho on AMD, it's because they know K8L will completely rip Intel apart in the server arena (where Dell makes most their money).

Re:Dell had to do something (1)

LWATCDR (28044) | more than 7 years ago | (#16039839)

Except that both IBM and HP will have the same type of systems available. Also the 5000 series only holds it's own up to two sockets. After that the Operon has an advantage with it's hypertransport links.
Even with the Xeon 5000 and 7000 with Dell you are at a dead end. If you ever want to go past four cores you have to get a new vendor. Dell really doesn't offer anything that compete with the high end servers from IBM, HP, and Sun. As I said they just move commodity boxes that anybody else can offer.

Re:Dell had to do something (1)

dfghjk (711126) | more than 7 years ago | (#16038038)

Dell would argue that #2 is it's strength, not a weakness. Offering it's own Unix (something it has done in the past) requires significant capital investment and Dell's business model specifically is against that. It's been said for Dell's entire existance that it can't compete in the server market because of #2 but it hasn't been proven so (yet).

Dell HAD an upgrade path... (1)

saleenS281 (859657) | more than 7 years ago | (#16038137)

I think you're quickly forgetting that Dell had, and dropped the Itanium. An upgrade path "beyond x86" is overrated.

search for "dell 6850" for reference.

Re:Dell HAD an upgrade path... (1)

htd2 (854946) | more than 7 years ago | (#16038664)

Dell needed a 64bit platform if only for marketing purposes and with their once exclusive deal with Intel that ment Itanium because there was nothing else.

In reality it wasn't much of an option for them because Itanium has done best in HPC and high end SMP boxes. HPC is a market that Dell could address but they struggled against IBM and HP who were able to wrap Itanium and x86 offering with services and software support to impliment big HPC clusters. Large SMP is a market that Dell could not realistically address because there is no commodity interconnect for >4 module Itanium/EMT-64 leaving them with the option of cutting a deal with Unisys or one of the other >4 way Itanium vendors.

This left them with the 1-4 way commercial server market and x86-64's performance in both its AMD and Intel guises increasingly squeezed Itanium and both are AMD and Intel are now 64bit. Dells best hope to build relatively big commodity based servers now rests with Intel and AMD x86-64 products because both of them will offer 4 core modules for 4 socket servers much sooner than Itanium as they both offered 2 core modules for 4 socket servers earlier than the 2 core Itaniums.

Both IBM and Sun clearly thnink that there is a market for >4 module x86-64 boxes, IBM produce the X3 range and Sun produces the X4600. HP probably have a positioning problem with Itanium and Dell doesn't have >4 module interconnect.

Re:Dell HAD an upgrade path... (1)

drinkypoo (153816) | more than 7 years ago | (#16039138)

Large SMP is a market that Dell could not realistically address because there is no commodity interconnect for >4 module Itanium/EMT-64 leaving them with the option of cutting a deal with Unisys or one of the other >4 way Itanium vendors.

You don't even need a module if you're willing to have a nonconventional interconnect layout. Having every processor connect to every other processor is great, but if you're willing to give some of that up, then you can connect more AMD processors. If you wanted to , you could take something like 63 processors and connect them all in a line; memory access from one end to the other would have atrocious latency but the processors are designed for such an interconnect strategy.

More practically, I think we will see AMD come up with some glue in the fairly near future.

Re:Dell HAD an upgrade path... (1)

LWATCDR (28044) | more than 7 years ago | (#16039808)

Except that Dell has fallen to number four in servers behind IBM, HP, and Sun.

You give HP and IBM too much credit. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16039339)

Many of IBMs intel and AMD servers are unstable, and they require windows only hotfixes to run stable. This is complete garbage, and doesn't fit with their undeserved reputation for supporting open source. HP only sells AMD chips in their low end servers, if you want a decent machine you are stuck with xeons. And HP has 0 unixes, HP-UX was never worth using, and they are doing their best to kill of HP-UX and Tru64 both, along with PA-RISC and Alpha which were already killed off. HP has nothing in the way of "upgrading" beyond x86, they only have old, outdated, very slow high availability setups like nonstop. For a large percentage of tasks, a HA cluster of x86 machines is just as reliable, and much cheaper.

Also, Dell offers something IBM, Sun and HP don't, reasonable prices. Compare their pricing, Dell is always a few hundred to a couple thousand dollars cheaper. You can get just as good pricing from Sun or IBM or HP, but only if you are a big customer, and willing to waste that saved money on shitty support contracts from them.

Spellcheck (1)

mac123 (25118) | more than 7 years ago | (#16037377)

>>put if the reports are correct

Slashdot only has 15-20 stories a day...would it be too much to ask someone to proofread the briefs before posting them?

Re:Spellcheck (1)

xtracto (837672) | more than 7 years ago | (#16037443)


>>put if the reports are correct

Slashdot only has 15-20 stories a day...would it be too much to ask someone to proofread the briefs before posting them?


Not only that but, there isnt even an article linked in the summary, I mean, WTF has happened here?.

The sad thing is that I only realized that *after* reading the comments (maybe the Editors already gave up as nobody RTFA anyway).

TFA? (2, Insightful)

Carewolf (581105) | more than 7 years ago | (#16037379)

What? Is this such a loose rumor that you can't even link to someone spreading the rumor?

Re:TFA? (1)

vandan (151516) | more than 7 years ago | (#16042126)

Ha!

One point of sanity, exactly 50% down the page! Everybody above and below completely oblivious to the fact that they are arguing over fuck-all content-wise. It must be the general attitude of the 'article' that gets everybody revved up.

Check out AMD's and Dell's wrongdoing (-1, Offtopic)

persuasion (998213) | more than 7 years ago | (#16037381)

They're here: http://malfy.org/ [malfy.org]

Re:Check out AMD's and Dell's wrongdoing (1)

rbarreira (836272) | more than 7 years ago | (#16037543)

The only item under AMD on that site is:

Outsourcer of jobs to overseas, according to CNN's Lou Dobbs, at a time when huge numbers of US tech workers are unemployed.

In other words, they do exactly the same as most other tech/IT companies (including Intel).

By the way, why do you keep linking [slashdot.org] to that site?

Re:Check out AMD's and Dell's wrongdoing (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16038036)

So what if an International Company that does business in many countries actually employs people in those countries

This is what many of the countries cited on this site are accused of. BMW is a GERMAN Company. Yet it could be labelled just like for example IBM just because it employs people outside of Germany.

This site as it stands is just a TROLL.
Lawsuits are a way of life in many parts of the world. And yes quite a few of them are valid. The site make no mention of the changes that some companies make after a one is concluded.
If could be a good reference if they didn't quote places like CNN and took a more even handed view of the world of business. CNN as broadcast in the US is totally US Centric. CNN International which takes a much more even handed World Wide view.

What about supply? (2, Interesting)

brucmack (572780) | more than 7 years ago | (#16037387)

I think it's great that AMD is more in demand, but will they have the manufacturing capacity to keep their customers supplied?

Re:What about supply? (1)

edxwelch (600979) | more than 7 years ago | (#16037467)

Actually the supply of Conroes and mermoms is pretty tight at the moment. Offering AMD dual core chips will releave that (I mean who will want a Netburst, or single core, when you have affordable dual cores)

That doesn't matter.... (1)

TangoCharlie (113383) | more than 7 years ago | (#16037515)

It's irrelevant because no way is Dell going to have 50% of its sales, or even server sales, running
on AMD. I'd be surprised if it got to 10%.... less on the Desktop.

lol (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16037388)

all this talk about dell using amd chips in a lot of their shit WAS KILLED when intel released woodcrest/conroe. AMD is now a bargain bin low cost cpu, much as it was 10 years ago. GOOD WAY TO LOSE GROUND THERE OVERNIGHT FELLAS. dell will sell a very small percentage of cheap systems with amd cpu's, but the bulk of the business will be with the superior chip, intel.

also, intel chipsets do not suck ass consistently like amd platforms. you'd think nvidia/ati/whoeverthefuck makes their chipsets can do it with less bugs.

Why is it only poor people who like amd? are you guys mad you don't have any money for a good product? it's as if you buying that VW is the same thing as buying a BMW.

LOL

Re:lol (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16037486)

That was just STUPID!

You obviosly are one of those fanatic Intel fan boys. Nothing in what you said is true.

You demenstrated you have no concept of economics. The game is faster, cheaper and better. AMD has done a fantastic job of teaching that leason to Intel.

Re:lol (2, Informative)

drinkypoo (153816) | more than 7 years ago | (#16039177)

AMD is now a bargain bin low cost cpu, much as it was 10 years ago.

4+ core Opteron systems blow 4+ core Intel systems out of the water because of Hypertransport; processors can communicate intelligently. Intel is still using a single-memory-controller model for their hardware design, while AMD using using NUMA. Like all the rest of the big boys.

also, intel chipsets do not suck ass consistently like amd platforms. you'd think nvidia/ati/whoeverthefuck makes their chipsets can do it with less bugs.

I'll give this partial agreement. AFAIK AMD isn't making chipsets any more, which is sad because they made the best ones for the Athlon (original) processors.

Why is it only poor people who like amd? are you guys mad you don't have any money for a good product? it's as if you buying that VW is the same thing as buying a BMW.

Well, it's true that VW != BMW. For one thing, a new BMW is about ten times more likely to require warranty service. However, Audi == VW, and so does Lamborghini. Why don't you consider reality before you try making automotive similes?

AMD anti-trust case (2, Interesting)

edxwelch (600979) | more than 7 years ago | (#16037403)

This shows how well the AMD anti-trust case worked. Intel backed of their preditory discount schemes for fear of being ruled anti-competitive and then it no longer made sense for Dell to be an Intel only shop

Re:AMD anti-trust case (1)

bealzabobs_youruncle (971430) | more than 7 years ago | (#16037981)

So Intel backed down on predatory pricing and now Dell is selling slower CPUs? This does seem to really benefit the consumer ::insert eye roll here::

Re:AMD anti-trust case (1)

drinkypoo (153816) | more than 7 years ago | (#16039192)

The CPU core may be slower, but in 4+ core SMP systems, the AMD isn't strved for bus bandwidth like the intel is, and we're talking about servers here. Nice try, though.

Citations? (0, Flamebait)

saleenS281 (859657) | more than 7 years ago | (#16038152)

That is PURE speculation. Please provide us with said documents you have showing what Dell is paying per chip from intel. Until you provide such documents, please go back to your armchair expert corner.

Re:Citations? (1)

edxwelch (600979) | more than 7 years ago | (#16038985)

Ans how do you explain it then, clever dick? Why do Dell stick to Intel when all the benchmarks show AMD CPUs being faster and then turn full circle now?

Re:Citations? (1)

saleenS281 (859657) | more than 7 years ago | (#16056869)

Hrmm, we could start with market trust. There was a time not too long ago no self respecting IT manager would let an AMD chip within a thousand feet of his DC. Nobody ever got fired for buying Intel...

We could then move to "best tool for the job". Last I checked, AMD was never ahead in EVERY benchmark. Was it the better chip overall? Sure... but that doesn't mean it was the best for EVERY job.

Pricing? Core2 wipes the floor with A64 and is still priced lower, turns out Intel has 10x the fab capacity and has absolutely no issue selling chips at a lower price "legally".

Not good for AMD... (0, Redundant)

JAB Creations (999510) | more than 7 years ago | (#16037409)

This is not good for AMD. No CPU regardless of how fast it is will earn the positive points running in a computer equipped with only 512MB of RAM (or worse, 256). While it may mean more processors sold it also means AMD will be available in the least reputable (but most popular / least reputable) computer dealer. Dell should stick to giving the Celeron a bad name.

Mods, try -1 moronic. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16038390)

Which part of "server" did you have a hard time with? Nobody is talking about your shitty dell desktop.

Not so fast (4, Interesting)

acherrington (465776) | more than 7 years ago | (#16037411)

I before you start calling your dell rep for details, or your broker to buy stock. Just remember one thing. Dell has been rumoring this for YEARS and they still aren't seriously carrying AMD products. They like to use this to try and negotiate the best possible deal from Intel. Incorporating AMD would in theorey be easy to do, but integrating it into its supply line would take some time... plus dell would have to pour marketing dollars in to make customers feel comfortable with the change (think of the experience with coca-cola classic and coke II).

Personally (and off topic), I would love to see this happen. But don't count on it any time soon.

Re:Not so fast (1)

this great guy (922511) | more than 7 years ago | (#16039025)

It is true that Dell has been rumoring this for years. But today it's different: Dell has promised to their customers and shareholders that they will start selling AMD-based desktops in September 2006, and AMD-based servers by the end of 2006, as you can read on one of the many dell.com's webpages about the subject [dell.com].

You can't say "it's still a rumor". This is wrong. If they don't do it now, they will get severly sanctionned by their shareholders this time.

Re:Not so fast (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16040240)


> (think of the experience with coca-cola classic and coke II)

Ok, I'm thinking about it.

I suppose this would be a valid analogy if "New Coke" had already been adored by millions of people for years before the CocaCola company first began shipping it.

AMD has years of proven success in: (1) delivering price/performance value; (2) IA-32 compatibility; and (3) delivering quantity+quality.

As a result, the past 5 years have seen a huge drop in the number of people who would have any concerns at all about getting an AMD box instead of an Intel box.

Plus, Dell is one of the final box makers to start adopting AMD, so it's not like they're entering unchartered waters here.

This is about as safe a move as it's possible to make in this business.

(Your point about Dell being able to negotiate a better deal from Intel is well taken, and supports my point about the safety of Dell's move.)

Maybe.. (3, Interesting)

Junta (36770) | more than 7 years ago | (#16037434)

If Dell took AMD seriously in 2006 that would have happened, but not so sure about 2007..

Same with IBM, both only just now really started taking AMD seriously and did so just in time for Woodcrest to come and tip price-performance back to Intel systems. AMD still has the memory performance advantage, but Woodcrest/Conroe's 4 ops per clock and relatively aggressive pricing mean AMD has to do something. I don't know AMD's schedule for quad-core offhand, but know Intel Clovertown is supposed to be probably 2nd quarter of 07. It's possible that in going to quad-core Intel's memory architecture could choke them and give AMD a more thorough advantage, or that AMD also gets similar performance while going to quad-core as Intel gets with Woodcrest/Conroe and the scales tip to AMD again.

I expect more from 65nm (2, Informative)

Lonewolf666 (259450) | more than 7 years ago | (#16037757)

Sure, the quad cores will be great for high end systems. Think E-ATX systems with two sockets and a total of eight cores.
But for the average buyer, I think AMD moving to 65nm manufacturing will be more relevant. It should result in lower manufacturing costs and hopefully higher clock speeds, making the Athlon X2 more competitive compared to Intel's Core 2 Duo.
The shrink to 65 nm will also arrive sooner than the quad cores. Others in this thread have speculated that Dell might be the first to get some of the new chips in September(did AMD convince Dell with that?). In the mass market, they might show up late this year or early next year.

Tech News? Bah... (1)

Inverted Intellect (950622) | more than 7 years ago | (#16037494)

This isn't so much tech news as it is financial news, and despite the popular support which AMD has among the nerd community, this hardly warrants a mention at tech-centered news sites (though many of those bring increasingly financial related news). Move on, nothing to see here.

buy .com stocks! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16037542)

Like my friend totally said that .com companies are totally coming back this year, only there here to stay. Like they've learned from their lessons. There's no way they can fail this time, it's a guarantee. It sounds sort of like hype, but believe me, it's like totally true.

Fuck, I don't see even one source in this article. This ain't news, it's speculation by some fanboy sitting in their mom's basement. There's not a single hard fact behind this.

Slashdot's become a tool gathering.

where is TFA ? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16037785)

(n/t)

Yeah! Go AMD! Finally, Dell! (1)

LesPaul75 (571752) | more than 7 years ago | (#16038582)

Yeah right.

Here comes my standard AMD+Dell troll, which has held true for years. But that never prevents it from being moderated as troll.

Dell will never ship an AMD CPU (in a PC). I had to add the parenthetical part recently because someone pointed out that Dell does sell individual AMD CPUs. Intel and Dell are the same company. Intel makes the chips, Dell makes the plastic boxes that hold them. Move along.

Re:Yeah! Go AMD! Finally, Dell! (1)

paitre (32242) | more than 7 years ago | (#16040149)

You're a moron.

In all cases prior to now it's been strictly rumor.

That is NOT the case today. Today, Dell has promised, PROMISED, product delivery. Not said "we're thinking about going amd", but "We will be delivering multiple desktop SKUs in September and server SKUs by EOY."

Failure to deliver on that promise, or to backtrack on it, will result in Dell seeing their share price slashed, and the history of the Intel/Dell relationship being so closely scrutinized by the FTC that Intel should be scared shitless by the prospect.

This ain't the usual AMD fanboi "OMG!!! Dell is going AMD!!!" schtick that has been an almost annual tradition since the Athlon was released. This time, it's real. Product has been announced.

Re:Yeah! Go AMD! Finally, Dell! (1)

LesPaul75 (571752) | more than 7 years ago | (#16062716)

Yep, you're right. This is the one. All the others have just been hype, but this one is real. My bad. I'm wrong this time, for sure. Apologies.

This article puts it at closer to 1/3 (2, Informative)

heli0 (659560) | more than 7 years ago | (#16039513)

http://www.digitimes.com/mobos/a20060904A1001.html [digitimes.com]

Dell reportedly to use about 20 million AMD CPUs

  Celia Lin, Taipei; Jessie Shen, DigiTimes.com [Monday 4 September 2006]

Market sources say that about 20 million Advanced Micro Devices (AMD) processors will be used in Dell's servers, desktop PCs and notebooks between the fourth quarter of 2006 and the fourth quarter of 2007. Dell will use four million AMD CPUs in its notebook line while sixteen million AMD CPUs will appear in Dell's desktop and server products, according to the sources.

Sources in the Taiwan notebook industry pointed out that AMD has progressively expanded its presence in the notebook sector, by adding Dell as one of its major supporters in addition to Hewlett-Packard (HP) and Acer. Obtaining Dell's support would better convince domestic notebook manufacturers to divert more R&D facilities and resources to AMD-based products, the sources indicated.

AMD declined to comment on the report and denied to reveal any details of the company's relationship with customers.

On May 18, AMD announced that Dell stated in its quarterly earnings statement that it intends to offer AMD Opteron Dual Core processor-based servers. According to Dell's August 17 press release, the PC vendor will launch Dimension desktop computers with AMD processors in September and will introduce a two-socket and multi-processor server using AMD Opteron processors by the end of 2006. So far, announcements of Dell's notebooks with AMD processors have not yet been made, though various rumors have circulated that Dell's first AMD-based notebook will be introduced in the fourth quarter of 2006.

According to International Data Corporation (IDC), Dell shipped 37.78 million PCs (including desktops, notebooks, ultra portables and x86 servers) in 2005, up 18.9% from the 31.77 million units that the company shipped the previous year.

With an average annual growth of 20% in full-year shipments, Dell is aggressively estimated to hit the 45 million mark in PC shipments this year and 55 million units in 2007, according to market sources. Accordingly, the 20 million AMD CPUs are expected to be used in a third of Dell's overall PC shipments, jumping from 0% at present, the sources found.

According to Mercury Research, AMD's overall market share stood at 21.6% in the second quarter of 2006, with on-quarter growth in the desktop and server sectors reaching 0.6- and 3-percentage points, respectively. In the meantime, AMD's share of the notebook CPU market had a sequential drop of 0.3-percentage points in the second quarter to 13.3%, data released by the research firm showed.

In related news, market sources speculated that AMD may face a situation where demand exceeds supply. Instead of a tight capacity concern, a shortage is predicted to surface in the channel market, as the chip vendor will give priority to PC vendors Dell, HP and Acer, according to the sources. An August 7 article cited sources as revealing that AMD aims to ship 12 million notebook CPUs in 2006, accounting for 15% of the world's notebook CPU market.
Check for New Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...