Comments on: Dell debuts first two AMD servers

Former Intel stronghold begins selling servers using AMD's Opteron chip; more partnership products expected.

[i_made_this]

dell not the sharpest knife in the drawer

This is another brilliant supplier partnership Dell should've done a half decade ago. In another five years, I bet we'll even see Dell announce a brilliant supplier partnership with Red Hat to pre-load systems that ship with guaranteed Dell Linux-expert support.

No wonder Wall Street hasn't had a positive thing to say about the company in over two years. Wall Street's been way too kind.

[chuck_whealton]

Re: Dell not the sharpest knife in the drawer

I'd have to agree with you on both accounts. They should have
done this YEARS ago.

As for RH on their servers, who knows. At least by not selling
systems either without an OS or with Linux on them, I made my
first Mac OS/X purchase. I called, they said they wouldn't sell a
"Windows-less system', I went elsewhere. I wonder how many
others have done the same, even if it was just another
inexpensive PC from another vendor.

Charles R. Whealton
Charles Whealton @ pleasedontspam.com

[anarchy1999]

Dell+AMD = "NADA"

If you want a server with at 8 chips, then the Opteron is the best choice. But if you only require 2-4 chips in a server, than the Opteron is a waste of money because the dual core Xeon is far more superior in that area.

As a consumer, OEMs always take advantage because they always assume that you have no idea what you are buying. And for most part that's very true, because many people are computer hardware illiterate and they think the OEMs are honest. DAH... The savings Dell is trying to offer would get you a few cases of Bud. If that's not your type of drink, then don't stress out about Dell. Dell is just trying to sell cheaper servers and stay out from the legal BS Ruiz is promoting.

Dell should reinvent itself and not compete with eMachines.

[fred dunn]

BS to the extreme

Anything over two socketed chips on an intel server requires the XEON share the FSB just to communicate with each other. This communication competes with system memory and I/O cummunications so the FSB become a bottleneck. Why do you think their "Tulsa" chips will have 16MB of L3 cache? Not because they like to have massive dies but because they will need to try and cache as much as they can to get over the HUB architecture (even dual channel) FSB bottelneck.
AMD on the other hand can communicate between processors over the hypertansport with out having to touch the FSB.
Get your facts straight, Intel has even admitted to this and that is the reason they are going with a Hypertransport like mechanism "CSI" in 2008-2009.