Feeds

IBM strikes out at Intel with new Opteron box

Still behind HP and Sun

  • alert
  • submit to reddit

Security for virtualized datacentres

IDF Fall '04 With the Intel Developer Forum rolling along in full force, IBM made the obvious decision to announce its next-generation server based on AMD's Opteron processor.

The eServer 326 will start shipping in limited volume next week as the follow on to IBM's current e325 system. Like its predecessor, the e326 is a two-processor, rack-mount box aimed at handling scientific computing workloads. Unlike the e325, however, the new system will be able to hold AMD's dual-core version of Opteron due out next year.

The e326 has 8 memory slots and can support up to 16GB of total memory. It also has 2 PCI-X slots and can support up to 2 SCSI or Serial ATA drives. It starts at $2,189 with Red Hat Enterprise Linux 3.0, SuSE Enterprise Linux 9.0, and Windows 2003 Server available as supported operating system options.

While IBM pitches itself as a major AMD Opteron backer, it has in fact fallen behind HP and Sun Microsystems in the Opteron server wars. The e325 was the first Opteron-based server from a major vendor, but IBM never followed this product with the class of systems currently being delivered by its two rivals. Both HP and Sun have numerous general purpose machines, as opposed to IBM's single server and workstation aimed more at technical computing types.

HP plans to expand its Opteron line in the coming months with a new two-way system and blades. Sun is also looking to roll out a new fleet of in-house designed Opteron systems.

IBM, meanwhile, has spent more time touting its Power-based servers than the 64-bit Opteron gear. It seems to make Opteron announcements when it can take a convenient shot at rival and partner Intel.

Our sources, however, indicate that HP has been much braver about angering Intel with regard to the release of AMD-based systems. IBM has pulled back from designing Opteron-based blades and a four-way system at Intel's urging, the sources said. In return, IBM received a favored marketing status when Intel recently rolled out its x86-64-bit Xeon processor. ®

Related stories

HP gears up for Opteron server binge
Intel admits Itanium pains, plots server future
IBM and Intel open some blade server specs
Itanium sales fall $13.4bn shy of $14bn forecast

Providing a secure and efficient Helpdesk

More from The Register

next story
Docker's app containers are coming to Windows Server, says Microsoft
MS chases app deployment speeds already enjoyed by Linux devs
IBM storage revenues sink: 'We are disappointed,' says CEO
Time to put the storage biz up for sale?
'Hmm, why CAN'T I run a water pipe through that rack of media servers?'
Leaving Las Vegas for Armenia kludging and Dubai dune bashing
Facebook slurps 'paste sites' for STOLEN passwords, sprinkles on hash and salt
Zuck's ad empire DOESN'T see details in plain text. Phew!
Windows 10: Forget Cloudobile, put Security and Privacy First
But - dammit - It would be insane to say 'don't collect, because NSA'
Symantec backs out of Backup Exec: Plans to can appliance in Jan
Will still provide support to existing customers
prev story

Whitepapers

Forging a new future with identity relationship management
Learn about ForgeRock's next generation IRM platform and how it is designed to empower CEOS's and enterprises to engage with consumers.
Why and how to choose the right cloud vendor
The benefits of cloud-based storage in your processes. Eliminate onsite, disk-based backup and archiving in favor of cloud-based data protection.
Three 1TB solid state scorchers up for grabs
Big SSDs can be expensive but think big and think free because you could be the lucky winner of one of three 1TB Samsung SSD 840 EVO drives that we’re giving away worth over £300 apiece.
Reg Reader Research: SaaS based Email and Office Productivity Tools
Read this Reg reader report which provides advice and guidance for SMBs towards the use of SaaS based email and Office productivity tools.
Security for virtualized datacentres
Legacy security solutions are inefficient due to the architectural differences between physical and virtual environments.