Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : LSI Corporation -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Jock Hutchinson who wrote (20723)	11/24/1999 5:04:00 AM
From: dr_elis	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 25814

Why should LSI be affected by the decision of computer producers to use the Pentium III instead of the Xeon in their workstations and servers? Michael

To: Jock Hutchinson who wrote (20723)	11/28/1999 11:14:00 AM
From: Tony Viola	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 25814

Jock, I looked into the "Xeon not selling well" article that was mostly about HP." A piece of it: Hewlett-Packard is dropping the Xeon--a more expensive derivative of the Pentium III--from its workstation product lines because of tepid demand. Dell, meanwhile, will not be adopting the newest members of the chip family for its workstations, although it will pick up later versions, executives at the companies said. The cold shoulder for Xeon largely comes as a result of overlap in the Intel product line. Xeons cost more than standard Pentium IIIs but do not provide much advantage, executives and analysts said. "People aren't necessarily following Intel's guidelines," said Shawn Willett, an analyst at The Aberdeen Group. "The chips that are supposed to have lower performance are performing at or close to the level of the higher [end] ones." Xeons mostly get used in servers, and the volume of Xeon workstation chips remains small. Still, indifference to the product line among workstation product managers will likely have at least some impact on Intel's bottom line. Xeons for workstations cost between $50 and more than Pentium IIIs and, generally, are more profitable than Pentium IIIs. The key is this: Xeons mostly get used in servers, and the volume of Xeon workstation chips remains small. Intel server usage is still going up, if you believe Intel, and right now almost all Intel based servers are on Xeon. What we have to hope for next is that LSI storage parts get designed into the IA-64 (Itanium and successors) servers. That's the cause for the grey non-Intel server based section getting squished down even more in 2001 and 2002. (See bar graph about half way down): intel.com The key difference between workstations and servers is that servers are primarily transaction processing machines, whereas workstations are used primarily for design needing great graphics. The transaction aspect requires very large L2 caches, which Xeon has, up to 2 MB per chip. This very large L2 is wasted in WSs. I still don't know whether LSI SCSI chip controllers are use in workstation motherboards, but I haven't heard that they were designed out of the servers (I looked at the Intel server chassis specs but they don't mention other companies' products in them like they used to). developer.intel.com Not too conclusive, I know, but we still know that storage is growing much faster than CPUs, and I have to believe LSI/Symbios continues to get their share. Tony