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 : Intel Corporation (INTC) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Tony Viola who wrote (137524)	6/18/2001 9:07:15 AM
From: Dan3	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

Re: once Athlon4 SMP has been out for a few months. They'll go up: Sure, sure. Just like AMD's mobile ASPs went up when it moved to the K6-3+ to compete with mobile coppermine.

To: Tony Viola who wrote (137524)	6/18/2001 1:52:29 PM
From: Dan3	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 186894

Re: You can't touch the big cache Xeons and Tualatin for servers will be more expensive than PIII. You are, at best, being hopeful here. The only direct comparison tests to date confirm that neither PIII Xeon nor P4 Xeon can touch Athlon4 - even when Athlon4 is clocked a heck of a lot lower. For goodness sakes, Tony, SMP 1.2GHZ Athlon4s were 20% faster than SMP 1.7GHZ Xeons, and nearly twice as fast as SMP 933 PIII's. A larger cache can help that, but it's not going to make up that big a difference, and costs go through the ceiling. The whole point of a big cache Xeon is maintain IPC in an SMP environment under heavy load. And Athlon4 does that admirably without a large cache, possibly due to its point to point architecture. Why Athlon4 performs so well under server loads isn't important, what is important is that it does. anandtech.com Replacing 50 Xeon servers with 30 Athlon4 systems saves setup time, it saves on administration and maintenance costs, and it saves on software costs. Where 50 Xeon servers, their setup costs, and their software licensing costs would cost $1,000,000, the same capacity delivered by 30 Athlon4's would come in around $500,000 to $600,000. In these days of tight margins, that can be a decision making difference, even under a "nobody was ever fired for buying Intel/Compaq/IBM influence. The only segment of the server market that isn't shrinking is the $5K to $10K segment, and that segment almost doubled last year as larger server sales fell. AMD is targeting the only part of the server market showing any growth, and it's doing so with systems that substantially outperform Intel based systems, while costing less. There is no way Intel can maintain its ASPs on servers. It's heartwarming that you have such a NiceGuy attitude about Intel servers, but you're being unrealistic. Dan

To: Tony Viola who wrote (137524)	6/18/2001 2:14:17 PM
From: Dan3	Respond to of 186894

Re: If you say the big OEMs will throw the Athlon MP at Intel, Intel says fine, where's the server, and when's it ready to ship? Oh, it's a one year development proposition? That's where AMD was a year ago. Several (so far small 2nd or 3rd tier) vendors are already offering 1U form factor dual processor servers. Your year of development has already passed and the results can be purchased at: boxxtech.com You can't seriously think Compaq and HP aren't waving these things in Intel's face during pricing negotiations. Take a look at that link, then check out the performance at: anandtech.com The development is done. Tyan is a very respected vendor of server boards, and samples are in the hands of the OEMs now. A 1U server is a motherboard amd some stock parts (HD, PS, and some fans, given the integration of the motherboards used in these servers). The year has passed, the servers are ready, the pressure is on Intel. Dan