Hard Light Productions Forums
Off-Topic Discussion => General Discussion => Topic started by: Scuddie on May 19, 2006, 10:44:03 pm
-
LOS ANGELES, May 19 (Reuters) - Intel Corp. (INTC.O: Quote, Profile, Research) shares fell to a three-year low Friday after No. 1 personal computer maker Dell Inc. (DELL.O: Quote, Profile, Research) said it would begin using chips from smaller Intel rival Advanced Micro Devices Inc. (AMD.N: Quote, Profile, Research), whose shares surged.
Dell said that for the first time in more than two decades, Intel will no longer be its sole provider of computer microprocessors, the brains that run computers.
It's a big coup for AMD. Until the company came out with its Athlon and Opteron processors, it had been largely regarded as a maker of cheaper, lower-performing Intel clone chips.
Intel shares traded for as little as $17.94 early in the session, their lowest level since April 2003. At midday they stood at $18.18 on Nasdaq, down 2.5 percent. AMD shares gained $2.60, or 8 percent, to $34.95 on the New York Stock Exchange.
Dell said late on Thursday that it will use AMD's Opteron microprocessors in some high-end corporate server machines. That announcement sealed a long-running on-again, off-again courtship between the two companies.
The pact, announced as Dell reported its quarterly results, only applies to a category of powerful business computers known as servers. The agreement does not end Intel's coveted status as Dell's only provider of microprocessors for desktop and laptop personal computers.
"The question on everyone's mind today will be what the relationship implies for additional AMD business at Dell," Merrill Lynch analyst Joe Osha said in a note to investors. "The most likely outcome is a tough fight between the two companies for Dell's business, especially in desktop."
Merrill Lynch expects AMD's share of the market for server microprocessors will rise to 26 percent by the end of the year, up from 16 percent a year earlier. AMD's share will continue to gain next year and could hit 30 percent, Osha said in his note.
Intel, struggling to regain market share and kick-start profit growth, is overhauling its product line this year, promising chips that use less electricity while performing faster.
Analysts have said that so long as Intel comes through on its promise, AMD's deal with Dell shouldn't be a big blow.
Before the market opened on Friday, some analysts warned that Intel's stock could fall to about $16 within a few days on fears the Dell decision will propel AMD to greater market share gains, according to Tim Ghriskey, who manages more than $1 billion for Solaris Asset Management.
"That's a very bearish scenario," he said. "It's sort of a worst case."
Solaris owns AMD shares but hasn't held Intel for about a year. Ghriskey said he was considering buying Intel after Friday morning's drop. "We're salivating at today's decline. It's quite a gap," he said before the stock market opened.
Jim Huguet, president of Great Companies LLC, said Dell's decision to go with AMD for some server chips was not a "devastating blow" for Intel.
"Intel still has a lot of business and a lot of customers," said Huguet, whose firm manages about $1 billion. "Smart people are running the company, but I'm sure they'd rather not have that happen."
http://today.reuters.com/business/newsArticle.aspx?type=technology&storyID=nN19174845
Wow... So much to comment on, but I am in a state of shock and awe, and honestly without words.
-
Good!
**** Intel, crappy over-priced, under-powered pieces of junk anyways. And, go Dell. I mean, they are really trying to reshape their image from a maker of crappy, inferior, and buggy products into something more long term and stable.
-
It's interesting that Dell decides to do this now of all times. The AMD64 line has reigned supreme for the last three years, but at this stage, all indications are pointing to the Core 2 taking a big performance lead in September. I think this is probably only for high end quad socket servers, where Intel's reliance on a conventional FSB will hold back the woodcrest core.
-
Yeah, Intel Core and Core 2 CPU's will most likely gain the performance crown until AMD comes up with a successor to current line of A64-based CPU's. As to why Intel decided to keep the outdated FSB-approach with their Core CPU's has me puzzled, FSB is fast enough for their single- and two-core CPU's but most holds back quad-core CPU's. Intel really should've gotten rid of FSB while designing Core.
-
Yes YES. Die Intel Die.
-
New Intel Cores are awesome, unless AMD comes up with A64 successor before I build my next gaming rig, my next CPU will be Core 2 Duo. :p For the first time since Pentium 2, there is actually a chance that my next CPU will be Intel and not AMD.
-
Word.
Core looks pretty cool. I've been building a new rig every year for the past three years and they've all been AMD-based, and just when I can't afford to upgrade again Intel bring out a competitor. Typical. :p
-
It's interesting that Dell decides to do this now of all times. The AMD64 line has reigned supreme for the last three years, but at this stage, all indications are pointing to the Core 2 taking a big performance lead in September. I think this is probably only for high end quad socket servers, where Intel's reliance on a conventional FSB will hold back the woodcrest core.
I think Dell have been struggling of late, haven't they?
-
Actually, dell's been struggling ever since Lenovo bought out IBM.
-
well, this'll be good
even more of an nvida vs ati style war over who can make better processors and sell them cheaper.
yay for business working like it should.
-
I do like the Core 2 alot, but imagine how much better it would be if it had a hypertransport like link instead of a high latency FSB ?
Definately AMD has to step up the successors to the current line to compete.
-
AMD should name their next line of dual-core processors "ARM". *wink wink nudge nudge*
-
:confused:
-
Total Annihilation reference - two sides, the CORE and the ARM :)
And once again I find myself thinking that having owned an Intel processor for about a year now, it's really not that bad... heck it's stable as a rock and doesn't overheat. I'm happy with it! But I'm about to upgrade and I'll be going AMD again as it's a complete upgrade and Intel are just too pricey.
-
No-one has really seen what DDR2-based Athlons perform like yet either. All indications are that they dont' get a significant boost, but still, they'll be on the market before intel. If I were going AMD, i'd surely get one of the new socketed ones as opposed to the older socket 939. But AMD are going with DDR3 in 2007/8 so I don't know if that requires yet a new socket or you can do a drop in upgrade to take advantage of a new core in Socket AM2. Or Move your Chip investment to a DDR3/AM2 type future platform, if such exists.
Either way, Core 2 is up by about 20 percent vs a similar current DDR1 based AMD chip, in the best case scenario. That's fairly large lead, even it it gets cut down, it'll still be a hell of a lot more competetive and aging Pentium line. Which themselves are not exactly slow. Hell most 2 Ghz + processors, with the exception of the Williamette, are not exactly slow. Pair any of them with a recent gen Gfx, and you'll always have a solid rig for many contemporary activities.
-
I cannot see the merge to DDR2 as good at all. The nature of the integrated memory controller is optimized for low latency ram. The purpose of the integrated controller is completely removed once a CAS latency of 4 becomes commonplace. There is simply no way of AM2 to have the same efficiency as SKT939. Hell, they may as well use the FSB again.
-
AMD should name their next line of dual-core processors "ARM". *wink wink nudge nudge*
That would be hilarious, if the name hadn't already been taken by a CPU manufacturer (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ARM_architecture). It's a shame they havn't entered the larger PC component market, they make processors for other devices like handheld game consoles and stuff.
-
Now that you mentioned it, I am eagerly awaiting the return of Soundstorm. I'm really fed up with Creative's monopoly as far as sound cards are concerned. Even though return of Soundstorm was prophesized about two years ago, the last official word from NVIDIA from year ago is that Soundstorm is dead for good. But I hope it will prove to be untrue, I'd really like to see some competition in sound card industry, currently Creative is only competing against integrated audio solutions which are thanks to HDA-chips quite capable but does not support 3D-audio on hardware.
Would be awesome to see NVIDIA's return to sound card market and ATI coming right behind, that would give Creative a few chilly goosebumps.
-
Yes YES. Die Intel Die.
Lol.
Why the hateing?
btw, CHARISMATICS IN CHICAGO (IL.) ! WOOT!!
-
Now that you mentioned it, I am eagerly awaiting the return of Soundstorm. I'm really fed up with Creative's monopoly as far as sound cards are concerned. Even though return of Soundstorm was prophesized about two years ago, the last official word from NVIDIA from year ago is that Soundstorm is dead for good. But I hope it will prove to be untrue, I'd really like to see some competition in sound card industry, currently Creative is only competing against integrated audio solutions which are thanks to HDA-chips quite capable but does not support 3D-audio on hardware.
Would be awesome to see NVIDIA's return to sound card market and ATI coming right behind, that would give Creative a few chilly goosebumps.
Creative havn't been doing very well in that area lately anyway because they've been focussing on portable players, but since Apple have totally owned them in that dept. Creative have taken quite a huge financial hit and have said that now they're going to pretty much concentrate on computer sound cards again.
So it looks like any new competition lost it's chance to jump in at the opportune moment.
I still want an Audigy Platinum 2.
Lol.
Why the hateing?
They produce over-priced, over-marketed piles of ****, and people take it all in as if they're the only processor manufacturer.
-
Yes, I agree with you Fury about Soundstorm, Maybe it'll be on Nforce 5. But really, it was a luck piece of hardware - the chip was originally developed for the xbox and then released as part of the nforce1 chipset. The cost of licensing the DICE technology - Later called Dolby Digital Live - was too high for nvidia. That feature alone made that chip awesome, being able to encode into a AC3 stream from any source if you wanted (or switch between AC3 and PCM, nice choice. Try doing that with an Audigy 2!
Basically it made the nforce2 boards, when paired with a barton cored athlon xp and a high end graphics card, a little too good - still solid gaming machines and media centers today. No onboard sound chip since then has been as good. And that was 4 years ago !
Unfortunately, they didn't make the chips for the 64 bit athlons, which also introduced the other important upgrade over the athlon xp - integrated memory controller. What a shame. Well, hopefully, we see something surpasing soundstorm on boards very soon. that would give creative a run for their money, because they've basically been overcharging customers for the very boring technology that started with the SB Live and continuted through 4 iterations of the Audigy series ever since. The only choice has really been to shell out even more money for a boutique "pro-sumer" sound card if you were on a 64 bit system and wanted that soundstorm feature.
-
Total Annihilation reference - two sides, the CORE and the ARM :)
Heh. I thought he was referring to the actual ARM processor (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ARM_architecture) and was a bit puzzled myself.