Rumours about possible usage of processors by Advanced Micro Devices by Dell, the world’s largest computers maker, recently emerged once again when an analyst said that Dell might be stockpiling AMD chips to gear up for a large scale launch. Other rumours suggest that Dell’s recently unveiled XPS 600 Renegade will sport either AMD’s or Intel Corp.’s processors.
“We strongly believe that Dell will start AMD-based system shipments as early as (the second half of 2006),” Piper Jaffray analyst Les Santiago wrote in a report. He based his view on conversations with unnamed sources in the PC component supply industry, press reports indicating Asian designers are working on AMD-based systems for Dell, AMD inventory shortages suggesting Dell is purchasing the chips and other factors, CNET News.com reports. Dell declined to comment.
In November 2005 several wires reported that Dell had informed its Taiwan contract makers, such as Asus, Foxconn and Quanta, of plans to develop devices based on AMD’s microprocessors, and these suppliers are awaiting orders for global shipment, it is reported. Foxconn, which belongs to Hon Hai Precision Industry Co Ltd develops AMD-powered servers, ASUS designs mainboards and Quanta Computer develops notebooks based on AMD microprocessors. Dell called the information “rumours” and speculation.
Dell has been historically rejecting AMD processors citing the world’s second largest x86 microprocessor maker’s inability to supply its chips in mass quantities. Indeed, Sunnyvale, California-based AMD has been suffering from chip shortages for years being unable to fulfill the demand towards its products due to various reasons.
But while production capacities of AMD cannot be compared to Intel Corp.’s, who is rapidly transitioning to 65nm process technology to be able to ship even more chips, microprocessors manufactured by the smaller maker have been praised by analysts and press for their performance and relatively low power consumption.
But while the analysts predicted that Dell would start using processors by Advanced Micro Devices in the second half of the year, the Q3 is a timeframe when Intel is expected to release its new processors code-named Conroe that are projected to offer increased performance amid moderate power consumption on the desktop. This may undermine AMD’s abilities to compete in the desktop market, but the company may sustain its advantage in the server market for a few months from then before Intel releases its next-gen server chips.
Another rumour spread in a forum by an allegedly Dell employee is that the computer giant will release its gaming PCs running AMD processors this spring and the first of such products will be the XPS 600 Renegade system equipped with four graphics processing units.
Back in 2004 approximately 19% of Intel’s revenues came from Dell and about 16% from HP. No other computer makers accounted for more than 10%.
Comments currently: 6
Discussion started: 01/11/06 09:58:34 AM
Latest comment: 03/24/06 05:27:38 PM
Expand all threads |
Collapse all threads
[1-4]
1.
Just wanted to say that I continue to enjoy reading this site day in and day out ever since its inseption in 1999.
Everything from the reviews, editorials, poll's, and especially the news, no one does it better.
Through out the years the site has slowly refined its look without loosing its style and touch. The editors have also come to their own quite nicely.
Here's to a wonderfuly 2006 for you Anton! I can't thank you enough for all the free news all these years!
[Posted by: ODi | Date: 01/11/06 09:58:34 AM]
+ expand thread (1 answer)
- collapse thread
Thank you very much for the kind words! :) We will do our best to continue delivering the best news and reviews for you :)
[Posted by: Anna | Date: 01/11/06 11:12:47 AM]
2.
Does this make no sense to anyone else?
Since when do PC makers stockpile processors for six months before using them? Of all PC makers, would Dell do this? It makes no sense at all.
Also, if Dell were going to use AMD processors, wouldn't they have done this earlier? AMD enjoyed a greater competitive advantage in 2005 than they will in 2006, with Intel's superior manufacturing beating them to the punch with 65nm, and the Merom/Conroe coming out later in 2006. By the time Dell is reputed to start using AMD chips, the P8/P6++ will be out and should have no problems with anything AMD has. Already the Yonah was chosen by Apple over AMD processors, and this is from a company that enjoys being iconoclastic. So, clearly the future isn't as bright as the present for AMD, and the present isn't as bright as the recent past was, yet Dell didn't use AMD processors, and isn't about to.
Sounds strange to me, but I guess it isn't impossible.
[Posted by: TA152H | Date: 01/12/06 05:00:22 AM]
3.
I think it's quite unlikely. Frankly Dell just isn't that brave as a corporation. That's not altogether bad, they grew up on a conservative customer base so it's a natural evolution path for them. But that leaves them quite unlikely to take risks.
And then, moreover, AMD doesn't really need them. Sure it would drive up AMD volume "some" but there are plenty of AMD machines from HP and other vendors who are capable of delivering quite a quantity of machines should the market demand it.
AMD is going to beat Intel to the punch in 2006, imo. DDR2 and a solid laptop solution featuring Nvidia chipsets should do well for them. Execution will be there worry, as it always is. But if the new sockets provide an upgrade path to 65nm chips later in the year or early next year that will solid proof of a "good" current product, and a good upgrade path to the future.
Intel "may" offer Merom and Conroe this year and they may not. They've been late before, and they've never really been early with chip designs. Process designs they've delivered early but not new cpu's. It'll be a good chip, but frankly even Yonah isn't the godly chip we were all talking about last year. Neither was Intel's dual core chips. So how many products do you tell the market to "wait it will be REALLY good on the NEXT one" before the market stops buying it. Rumours are that Merom consumes too much power and thus it won't achieve high speeds at launch. They promise another drop to 45nm will fix this, but what kind of an upgrade path has Intel ever managed to keep in the past 2 years? They are not a dog, don't read this that way. But they have some issues and those issues are building now over several years. The market may just get fed up and leave them. They may not. Have to see on that.
This gives AMD continued opportunity to offer products the market wants, but can't get from Intel. Do they take what they consider the "chance" and try AMD? I'm betting quite a few more in 2006 will take that risk, as it will be perceived to be less of a "risk" than of a "why don't we just give this other machine a try" kind of thinking. IF, and only IF, that happens, you may see yet more surging in AMD sales. Intel's last holy ground is the mobile market. It remains to be seen if AMD can make grounds there.
2006 will be one of two things: AMD gently fading to black, or Intel realizing that it will have to execute in a nearly unparalleled way to keep on top. It'll be a fun year to watch for sure.
Option three (almost forgot) is they both stumble on execution and the current status continues until 2007...
[Posted by: Anemone | Date: 01/15/06 10:54:13 AM]
+ expand thread (1 answer)
- collapse thread
Anemone,
I don't really understand why you think AMD should do well in 2006. They already got beaten to the punch by Intel moving to 65nm, and DDR2 is an almost irrelevant technology that hasn't demonstrated much over DDR. You get higher clock speeds, and higher latencies. I was surprised AMD even wasted the effort and didn't just move to DDR3, which is supposed to be a bigger step up.
Who thought Yonah was going to be godly? I don't know anyone that thought this chip was going to be a huge improvement over its predecessors. It isn't the next microarchitecture, Merom is. In reality, it is a really impressive processor for what it is, and I am not the least bit disappointed in it. I don't think most people are, in most reviews it is viewed very favorably. Certainly Apple thought highly of it, and chose it over anything AMD had.
I disagree entirely about AMD not needing Dell. I think, particularly with the upcoming 65nm shrink and the new fabrication facility, they need to keep gaining market share to use up the increasing capacity. I'll agree Dell is looking a lot weaker than they used to, and their growth is stalled to say the least. I think, at least in small measure, their choice of Intel only is hurting them because Intel is not very competitive right now.
Well, I should say the P7 isn't very competitive now, whereas Intel defeated AMD for the Apple account with the Yonah. That is four percent market share, so it is substantial to say the least, assuming Apple holds its position as it transitions to Intel products. That also assumes they don't use AMD processor for other models, which is not a completely safe assumption.
I agree that nothing in the future is a certainty, but it looks like Intel has moved up the date slightly for the Merom. This being the case, and with the launch date not too far away, I think the risk of Intel not shipping in 2006 is extremely low. However, I would be more inclined to agree that there is a greater risk of not shipping in volumes and not shipping at the desired clock speed distributions they had anticipated. I am not saying this will happen, but I think the potential for that type of problem is always substantial with new processor releases.
However, since AMD has virtually nothing going on except the DDR2 non-event and the same shrink Intel has already made, I don't see their competitive position getting anything but worse. This isn't necessarily bad, because it is still favorable despite being lessened by Intel's Pressler and Yonah releases. However, if the Merom is even equal to Athlon 64, and I'd be shocked if it were not substantially better, Intel should be able to essentially destroy AMD and at the very least cause them to start losing a lot of money again. Intel has every advantage over AMD except processor design currently, and once AMD loses that advantage, I don't see how they can remain profitable. Well, there is one, that is Intel gets greedy and prices their processors so high, AMD can sell their processors for less and still make money. I am not sure if Intel will, having been embarrassed by AMD so many times since the release of the K7. My guess is they will go after them.
I would hate to be an AMD stockholder right now. Everything depends on Intel screwing up, and if they don't AMD is done. Still, betting on Intel screwing up has been pretty profitable for a decent amount of time, so it isn't hopeless. Still, I'd feel more comfortable with AMD if they had the successor to the aging K7/K8 architecture closer to release and more visible. The only thing I know about it is that they cancelled the K9. After that, AMD doesn't even mention anything and no one else does. I don't know how they handle a situation where the Merom is the equal or superior to the K8. This is not only possible, it is likely. Maybe after it is released we will hear more from AMD about their next design, I am sure they are working on something. I just have no idea what it is, or when they expect it will be released.
[Posted by: TA152H | Date: 01/16/06 07:59:00 AM]
4.
Unless you own stock in Dell, you could care less about Dell using AMD. Dell support is non-existant. I haven't purchased a Dell computer in years and don't plan to buy another. Michael Dell is the Michael Jackson of computer sales. People are being screwed after the initial buy in - people are complaining - but power and money are winning the day.
[Posted by: Dan | Date: 03/24/06 05:27:38 PM]
[1-4]
You must log in to add comments.
Unfortunately, the old registrations do not work anymore. Please register again. We apologize for the inconvenience.
Forgot password? Registration
Make Home Page
Add to Favorites
Print article
Send link to friend
Digg this
Post to del.icio.us
Post to Slashdot
