Comments on: For Dell and AMD, a tantalizing question
Will they or won't they? Dell execs remain elusive on AMD plans, but analysts say circumstances could push the two together.
Will they or won't they? Dell execs remain elusive on AMD plans, but analysts say circumstances could push the two together.
January 7, 2010 11:03 PM PST
January 7, 2010 10:41 PM PST
January 7, 2010 9:41 PM PST
Add headlines from CNET News to your homepage or feedreader.
More feeds available in our RSS feed index.
Related quotes
Where I work we also have a Dell deal, which is a pity because I know from testing that the AMD chips perform better for my workload.
I think Dell just isn't listening enough to their customers.
A perfect example was when Dell came out with a RAMBUS
memory based system because that was what Intel was pushing.
Intel had a huge windfall to gain if RAMBUS became the new
standard so it was pushing RAMBUS very hard. Dell, being the
true Intel lackey, came out with RAMBUS systems.
Similarly, what percentage of Linux and/or bare systems does
Dell ship? Dell pushes window boxes: laptops, desktops and
servers.
Don't expect anything different from Dell. It may happen, but
Hell might freeze over too.
Dell is in the business of MAKING MONEY. NOT a political or economic statement.
It may shock you to hear this, but the biggest cost of a PC for a manufacturer is SUPPORT.
Windows will dominate for a while because:
1) Most people know how to use it - hence, lower incidence of a tech call.
2) Linux users are more likely to "tweak" the OS and system configurations - raising tech call questions.
Intel will dominitate for a little while because:
1) They disclose all processor/chipset erratas publily.
2) They are willing to recall any defective chips - unlike AMD.
It's not about selling cheaper than the competition, it's also about lowering the cost of support.
Most of the AMD supporters I know bought AMD because it was generally cheaper. Many others bought AMD to "stick it to Intel." Only a few really got AMD chips because they beleived it was faster than any P4 out in the market.
An AMD gamer wouldn't buy from a mass-manufacturer. They either build it themselves, or buy it from a dedicated gaming company.
An Intel-Hater usually supports the little guy, and hence, usually buy white-boxes anyway.
And lastly, a person who buys PCs that are dirt cheap don't make much $$ for any manufacturer - even Dell.
In the corporate data-center world, I can attest that Up-Time is king. Fortune 500 companies pay a premium for uptime - that's why you have servers with RAID, massive amounts of RAM, multi-homed NICs, and reduntant power-supplies.
Intel's advantage is that their technologies and chips are very well proven, and tested against. AMD's track record for disclosing defects is abyssmal. Applications tested against their chips tend to be less than that of an Intel chip.
These are SOME of the factors an IT department takes into account when they buy servers. The Chip inside it matters - just as much as RAID, etc. etc. etc.
So, if an IT guy buys AMD servers and it works for them - THAT'S GREAT! But many other companies are not going to nickel-and-dime on the Processor when the few extra bucks buys them an added insurance for uptime.
- Dell could sell more computers if they made AMD processors available.
- by lingsun October 27, 2004 4:36 PM PDT
- Dell could be increasing their sales but they're not interested. That's stupid. I might be interested in an overpriced Dell machine and paying overpriced shipping if I didn't have to buy the overpriced Intel processor that comes with it. If I could get an AMD 3200+ processor instead of the Intel equivalent and save at least $100 I might be interested. I get the idea that Dell sells mostly to people who aren't very price sensitive. I would never buy from Dell as long as I can buy a Compaq with an Athlon processor at Best Buy.
- Like this Reply to this comment
-
(11 Comments)