Why is AMD Quiet
by Fouad Bakht - 6/10/05 12:14 PM
AMD makes excellent processors. I wonder why AMD it doesn't manufacture its own motherboards like Intel. Can someone explain please?
ATTENTION: Forums will be in Read Mode only starting today (3/06/2014.) This outage will start at 6 PM Pacific Time and last throughout the weekend for us to perform a major update to our site. We apologize for this inconvenience. Click here for details.
by: Fouad Bakht June 10, 2005 12:14 PM PDT
0 people like this thread
Most Motherboards for intel cpus are manufactured by others as well...
in terms of production capacity
AMD is far behind Intel
AMD has 1 fabrication facility (the plant that makes the actual CPU dies) and is building it's second, which is scheduled for completion sometime in the next 18 months
Intel has 20+ fabrication facilities (called fabs)
along with more money due to high dollar contracts with compaines like Dell or Hewlett-Packard
Intel's "Made by Intel" boards are (like dagger says) probably made by another OEM, such as Abit or Asus (Asus is as of a few weeks ago, the worlds largest board maker, with Foxconn in #2)
another example is ATi
their "BBA" line (Built By ATi) is all produced for them by Sapphire
Dell Anounced making AMD computers.
about 2 months ago. Their stocks jumped $3.00 a share that day. I wonder why!?!
I haven't seen that anywhere. The only link i found was this
But the article clearly states "Dell is not expecting, however, to put the AMD chips into desktop PCs." The article is dated yesterday June 9, 2005.
Fox news finacial report
Something Fishy Here
Dell is a popular brand name if not the best (at least it was). Thats a different story but the strange thing is that Dell doesn't use AMD, why? Till now, there haven't been any announcements about Dell incorporating AMD alongside Intel. But I think we ought to know why. Dont you guys think?
It is all about corporate politics and the almighty $$ business relationships and exclusivity. Why does a manufacturer offer only one type of processor? Many things foremost cost
Intel gives big rebates when you buy in bulk. Dell takes advantage of it, we can't. Don't you feel cheated?
??? Are you serious???
Intel made a deal with Dell years ago that they would get first dibs on all stock if they only sold Intel powered systems. Remember when there were shortages for all other venders, except for Dell. Purely business. Personally I'll never buy a packaged Desktop.
Why do you think Dell can now offer a PC for only $299?
Seriously, do you really think it's gonna be better than their other crapola PCs? A piece of junk with AMD in it is still a piece of junk... -_-
(NT) (NT) excuse me but dell isnt dat bad...
(NT) (NT) Dell stinks! Lousy marketing gimmicks!
(NT) (NT) Look at the main group they target... Computers for dummy's
by pcguru4u - 6/18/05 5:03 AM
Hardly. I suppose you were born a genius? Everyone starts their learning curve somewhere. (And some people tend to end theirs sooner) A basic computer, R&D'd to death and built to be STABLE only is what a Dell is. No OCxing, nada. Goof Proof. Why not offer that cheaply to the masses? If you're game, go build. That takes experience. I purchased a Dell thru E-Bay and got a new system for pennies on the dollar. The result...a solid, plain vanilla PC that works well. Why not? For gaming, I'll use a rig on the edge. But for now my pennies are well used for my kids .
As far as this discussion is concerned with (remember?), AMD puts their money into developing quality, not quantity. I hope they get big and give Intel a run for the money. Personally, I would think less of AMD if they started to saturate the market like Intel does, but being in busines means going for the money. And targeting niche users is not in the majority.
by IrisRose - 6/18/05 7:12 AM
These posts are starting to sound like chat room shenanigans. The above post is offensive and putative. I have been buying Dell for years, and I am no dummy, not with an MA from Stanford. My expertise is not in computers, although I'm pretty darn good with them, relied upon for help among a circle of friends. Not bragging at all, just qualifying myself as "not a dummy." I buy Dells because at this point, I cannot build my own.
That lack of skill does not make me a dummy, does it.
Nonsense! They hold the bulk of the corporate and university
by Dave Konkel [Moderator] - 6/18/05 8:18 AM
market because of their high quality and reliability (they've tied or won in the PC Magazine survey for both laptops and desktops virtually every year for the last decade plus). My own university is standardized on Dell -- we have more than 6,000 of them, and when we ouitsourced computer support to a commercial oinformation service support company, they're standardized on Dell, too.
-- Dave K.
Other reasons for standardizing
by Karios Kasra - 6/18/05 11:37 AM
Dell offers massive bulk deals for universities. Dell offers tech support (mostly from India, but I won't sweat the details). Dell uses proprietary parts in their systems so you will have to run to them every time you upgrade. Cheap computers doesn't necessarily equate to quality products. Dell is like the AOL of computers... and godforbid if anyone here is on AOL.
(NT) (NT) I gotta agree with that!
Did someone say that AMD has just one fab as compared to Intel's 20 fabs. Man! imagine what a tough time AMD is offering Intel with a 1:20 ratio. Imagine what its gonna do (play havoc) with Intel when it reahces to a ration of 20:20
You guys are the only ones buying AMD, you know...
All the big companies and other home users use Intel.
(NT) (NT) dats cuz most oems supply intels...not amds
by dagger906 - 6/11/05 12:24 PM
In Reply to: (NT) (NT) dats cuz most oems supply intels...not amds by nerdyboy1234
So? Good a reason as any... ^_^'
The main reason is because Intel and AMD focuses on different areas. Intel works on improving clock speeds, which to the average computer buyer, it looks good to. The truth is, even though AMD's Athlon64 3200 is only 2.0 ghz, it still competes with an Intel Pentium 4 at 3.0ghz (maybe some more too). I'm not saying Intel is bad or anything. Both companies are good, but they have different focuses on speed. And Since they are both faster in different areas, AMD is faster in some applications and Intel another. Gamers typicaly choose AMD over Intel because they are cheaper and faster in the gaming criteria. Unless you are a person that uses the computer for basic music and internet browsing, choose AMD.
Even if you're only doing the basics, like you said, why not go with a machine with the cheaper (but in my opinion, better) processor? I mean, why throw away your money, unless you've just got money to burn.
Like it's "buddy" software giant, Intel uses "coercive" marketing practices to keep market share. Now with Apple switching to Intel CPUs, it may be tougher for AMD to gain market share.
Having been in the "business" now since well before there was a "PC" on a desktop, I watched as Intel one the battle over the Zilog chips that also were superior to what Intel made. The old Zilog Z80 was much superior to the Intel 8080, even the Z80000 which was a 32-bit CPU that was offerd BEFORE Intel/IBM got the first PC on store shelves, AT&T and Olivetti (Italy) produced a 32-bit workstation (probably running Unix) that was light years ahead of Intel and Motorola.
Mobil Oil bought Zilog months prior to the IBM/Intel PC was marketed. In fact, from the early days, IBM wanted to compare the two companies offerings, however, MObil sacked many of the engineers at Zilog, and when IBM started inquiring about the Zilog chip capabilities, nobody from Mobil could answer, so it was by default that Intel won the war. I even built a PC clone using a Zilog processor and it was 2 times as fast as the Intel machine that IBM was selling at the time. I used that old PC for years before "upgrading" to a "486" Intel PC, and it wasn't until I got my first Pentium 4 machine that I felt I was getting any value from what Intel offered. Then along came the AMD K6 and K7 CPU and I switched to AMD.
One other note of significance: When AMD started touting their CPUs as faster than Intel with slower clock speeds, Intel pooh poohed that as a "cheap marketing ploy" however Intel bagan using that same ploy when it realeased its Hyper Threading technology. The same technology that AMD had built into its new processors.
For me, it's simple. AMD makes a better CPU and the world will not "buy" it because they belive the hype from Wintel, that they are the CPU gods, and PC vendors must pay homage to them.
Systems Administrator (and Chief Cook & Bottle Washer)
All you have said is just the truth, with AMD you run at lower Ghz. speeds & obtain a very high performance, I'm a computer store owner so I can compare both brands, I'm using AMD procesors (for me ever) & most times for clients since K6, AMD do more math operations at each cycle than Intel's, there is the main secret but there are more.