Dell moving to AMD for better performance

Discussion in 'MacBytes.com News Discussion' started by MacBytes, Feb 3, 2006.

  1. macrumors bot

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2003
    #1
  2. macrumors G3

    iMeowbot

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2003
  3. Moderator emeritus

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2002
    Location:
    Gone but not forgotten.
    #3
    Knowing that Michael Dell hates Apple so very much, I wouldn't be surprised if he would use AMD processors. Spite is a strange emotion. :D
     
  4. macrumors 68030

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2003
    Location:
    The Amalgamated States of Central North America
  5. macrumors 6502a

    law guy

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2003
    Location:
    Western Massachusetts
    #5
    As AMD struggles to make the move from 65nm from 90, Intel is shipping 65nm chips and showing its first pre-production 45nm chips. Technology writers have noted that the two companies have flip-flopped roles on look-ahead with Intel now being the very talkative one regarding the future pipeline with 20 new processors over the next 8 quarters with as many as 8 cores by 2008, and AMD becoming more quiet then they have been. It will be interesting to see how the technology lead may help Intel over the next year or two.
     
  6. macrumors G3

    iMeowbot

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2003
    #6
    Bingo. This year's crop of Intel chips is lining up to be itty bitty stupid fast with power consumption under control. AMD, meanwhile, still don't have the production capacity to hit the server market in the serious numbers a Dell contract would bring them. For suppliers like Dell who want to have a predictable, reliable product supply for their core business customers, sticking with Intel still makes sense.
     
  7. macrumors 601

    DMann

    Joined:
    Jan 13, 2002
    Location:
    10023
    #7
    Dell Cheaper Than Hell

    Unless AMD is willing to produce chips for LESS than
    Itel can, which is somewhat unlikely, then how is
    Dell gonna make a the slim profit he's accustomed
    to making?
     
  8. macrumors member

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2003
    Location:
    CA
    #8
    AMD is improving their capacity. They keep growing. I can't speak to the 65 nm transition, but I think they're still felt to have the technology lead, even with Core Duo chips available now.

    As for why we should care about Dell moving to AMD, it is a sign that Intel no longer has the stranglehold on the PC makers like they used to. Now that Apple is using x86 chips, the more competition in that market the better for everyone, including Mac users
     
  9. macrumors 603

    SiliconAddict

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2003
    Location:
    Chicago, IL
    #9
    Nothing new here. Dell does this once every few years so they can get some nice discounts. It’s a bluff. Never mind the fact that the CPUs Intel will be bringing out in the next 12 months are going to do an admirable job at *****slapping them.
     
  10. scu
    macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2005
    #10
    Actually I find this to be a very interesting piece of news. Apple is always looking for the best chips for its systems. One issue at this point is not speed but rather supplies. Intel can provide plenty of chips. Maybe in 8 years or earlier AMD can supply enough chips to satisfy Apple's growing base and appetite for speed.
     
  11. macrumors G5

    nagromme

    Joined:
    May 2, 2002
    #11
    Apple still has two--potential--suppliers for chips, and that's a good thing. They can use AMD any time they need or want to.

    Meanwhile, though, what does AMD have to compete with Core Duo in laptops?
     
  12. macrumors 68030

    homerjward

    Joined:
    May 11, 2004
    Location:
    fig tree
    #12
    turion 64. it's backwards compatible (i believe--same socket at least) with socket 754. only single-core out right now, dual-core later. 64 bit.
     
  13. macrumors G5

    nagromme

    Joined:
    May 2, 2002
    #13
    Is Turion a good match for Core Duo (er, Solo) in performance and power efficiency?
     
  14. macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2004
    #14
    it's amazing to me how much AMD kicks Intels butt in ALL benchmarking. From a marketing standpoint, Intel was the way to go for Apple. But do not let anyone tell you that Intel makes better chips than AMD. Hasn't happened for the past 3 years. The AMD X2 kicks anything to the curb.

    Not saying Apple didn't make the right decision to go to Intel, but there is no argument. AMD makes better chips, period
     
  15. macrumors 603

    shadowfax

    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2002
    Location:
    Houston, TX
    #15
    not period; comma, for now.
     
  16. macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    May 18, 2003
    Location:
    Rehoboth Beach, De
    #16
    This about leverage in negotiations with Intel as well as expanding sales to the AMD fanboys. Dell's "mission statement" is how do I decrease cost while increaseing sales and this fits neatly while creating free advertising.
     
  17. macrumors 601

    Yvan256

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2004
    Location:
    Canada
    #17
    Or, to put it more broadly, Apple now has the exact same limitations as PC makers. They have access to the same companies, same technologies, etc.

    It doesn't matter who's better for a given task (Intel, AMD, VIA, etc), Apple now can use them (unless they've signed an exclusive contract with Intel).

    Before the Intel switch, Apple was limited to "something else" and had to rely on them to compete with others in a different market. Now, they choose between companies competing in the exact same market. And it should end at least one side of the Mac vs PC debate (processors, computing power, etc).
     
  18. macrumors 601

    Yvan256

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2004
    Location:
    Canada
    #18
    Yes, but at what cost? (in the power department)

    I don't care if my computer is twice as fast if it's four times louder.
     
  19. macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    May 3, 2005
    Location:
    Chicago, IL
    #19
    AMD chips cost a lot less than Intel for the same level of performance. Take a look at the CNET bechmarks. In seven of seven test, the AMD won - easily in most cases.

    In the gaming benchmark, the slowest AMD 3800 x 2 was faster than the Intel EE840. That's the CPU that costs $1002 at New Egg - for the chip. The 3800 x 2 costs all of $313. That kind of showing is pathetic.

    I agree that this is all about negotiations. Dell does this every few years to Intel to get the best prices and then forgets about AMD - and therefore their customers - for the next few years.
     
  20. macrumors 6502a

    MacFan782040

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2003
    Location:
    Scranton, PA
    #20
    So who, besides Apple, does Intel make for now?
     
  21. macrumors G5

    nagromme

    Joined:
    May 2, 2002
    #21
    Also note that comparisons of AMD to Netburst (Pentium 4, Xeon, Celeron) are relevant to PC shoppers but not very relevant to Mac users: Intel is scrapping that whole line, and Apple won't be using it.

    Pentium M / Celeron M and now Core Duo/Solo are the current chips that actually relate to future plans. (Merom/Conroe is whole new generation about to hit this year. But they're advancements growing from the Pentium M lineage, not from Netburst.)
     
  22. macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    May 3, 2005
    Location:
    Chicago, IL
    #22
    Uhhhh, everyone.

    I might be wrong, but I don't think that there is a single AMD exclusive PC manufacturer out there. With the notable exceptions of the Intel only Dell, Toshiba, and Sony, most companies use a mix of both AMD and Intel in their lines like HP/Compaq, and Gateway/eMachines.
     
  23. macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2005
    #23
    well in the simple side
    Intel chips are the best laptop chips out there. Minus the die hards AMD people (even a lot of them think intel laptop chips are the best)

    Desktop side AMD is the best in most areas. Some areas Intell better.

    Now for Gaming AMD is the kind and has been for a while now and more than likely will stay that way.
     
  24. macrumors 68040

    ezekielrage_99

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2005
    #24
    I can see Dell going the AMD in there crumby Desktop, Gamer and Pro Machines, let's face it when Vista is released you will need as much power as you can to run it.

    But putting AMD in their Laptops I can never see happening honestly AMD portable CPUs are complete rubbish, that's why Apple didn't go AMD.
     
  25. macrumors newbie

    Sceadufax

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2005
    Location:
    London
    #25
    Surely this can only be a good thing, firstly it makes things fairer in the market, and secondly ,AMD's processors are cheaper and faster than anything than iNtel can offer right now, there still stuck on pentiums and there only WOW chip is the presler which costs something like £750 over here in the uk. I think it's true to say that iNtel have the laptop/portable edge and AMD have the desktop edge and I don't see why apple couldn't have used AMD desktop processors in the iMac/Powermac
     

Share This Page