Intel's package looks fine to us
And AMD is not an experiment
Letters Our recent story on Intel's hush-hush marketing plan around its new 64-bit Xeon processors managed to anger Intel and AMD fans at the same time, which is no small feat. Loyal readers trounced El Reg for discounting the practicality of Intel's "complete package" campaign. In addition, stating that AMD needs Dell as an Opteron customer to be considered a "made" player in the server market came off as a stance too bold for consumption. Add to that some political rhetoric, and many of you became incensed.
Here's a look at the many ways we managed to offend the chip geeks out there.
Ashlee, Sorry but this was another "me too" article from AMD proponents. As a system validation tester at EDS Systems, here in Plano, Texas you fail to give Intel even the smallest amount of credit.
Example: "..I Now we hear Intel hyping "the complete platform" .." ** Guess what, complete platforms is what customers want, choosing 'hyping' as Intel's message is a just a tad off on your part.
Example" "...Funny thing is the usually brash Intel has shied away from direct comparisons between its 64-bit extension line and competing processors from AMD.." ** Find just ONE public comparison by Intel of AMD. They never have. This has more to do with erring conservatively with monopoly laws. The RISK vendors are not in the same class of competitors. You might want to be a bit more truthful here.
"..In the case of Itanic, Intel rarely talked about the "complete package" because the "complete package" didn't look all that good..." ** Actually, "ITANIC", delivers the complete package for what Itanium products are targeted at - big iron systems we use here at EDS. Where is AMD's hotswap memory? Cache error/redudancy? Again, your slander of Intel just makes you a follower, so you too should say "reporting for duty."
Mr. Ashlee Vance, I found your article "Intel gets quiet about the competition" informative, though I'm not sure I understand your point about the Opteron only being "an experiment" unless Dell adopts it. It's very unlikely that Dell will ever adopt it--or any AMD chip. Dell's symbiotic relationship to Intel (the contractional details are undisclosed) are extremely tight despite the annual comical Dell dance number: "Were looking very closely at AMD chips now." Whether Dell's predictable statements are made for negotiations with Intel or for other reasons I won't speculate here, but they would obviously have too much to lose as a preferred Intel customer--or Intel retail outlet--to legitimize AMD in that way. On the other hand Cray, IBM and Sun ship their systems with Opteron chips and I think they would be reluctant to consider there brand name offerings "experimental".
sincerely, Ron K. Victoria, BC
You say, "AMD will have a most difficult time unseating Intel as the "standards-based" server king. For example, well-known processor analyst Nathan Brookwood has refused to raise his 64-bit processor Mindshare Alert to the extreme "red level" until Dell picks up Opteron for its server line. That's seems like a pretty fair way of judging whether or not AMD and Opteron have truly arrived. You don't get more standard than Dell, and without the Round Rock Express on AMD's side, Opteron is still an experiment."
Ashlee, I must respectfully disagree with you on this one. It is not a "pretty fair way of judging whether or not AMD and Opteron have truly arrived". The only reason why Dell doesn't ship any AMD based systems is because Intel has them in their front shirt pocket. Intel and Dell go hand-in-hand. IBM, Sun, and HP are all shipping AMD64 based systems. All are heavy hitters in the enterprise server market, and it would much fairer to use the three of them as a benchmark than Dell.
Opteron HAS arrived, and Intel's delay on 4GHz may help AMD even more.
Why don't you, and other press start educating people on WHY the AMD solution is better? Are you really a tech savy person, or just another Intel fan-person? If you look at the chips there is little difference between Intel and AMD, but if you look at the whole picture, i.e. platform to platform, Intel is still stuck in the shared bus age, while AMD took the right road and changed to HyperTransport, which has PROVEN to be a much better solution for multiple processors. Anyone with any tech knowledge has to admit that or look like a fool - the benchmarks don't lie. Add a processor to an Intel bix and gain a little, add one to an AMD box and gain a lot!
Remember, and I shouldn't have to remind you, just because Intel sells a lot of boxes doesn't mean they have the best product, which is what it seems you are trying to get across in this article.
Andy Woudstra Technical Advisor Holland Landing Ontario, Canada
how can you compare john kerry with Intel! they have nothing in common! at all. do me a favor and stop writing.
I guess the hate mongering republicans are everywhere. Why in the world does an article about Intels 64-bit Xeon server processor start off with a bit of character assasination of John Kerry? Sad and obnoxious all in one. Stick to the story at hand and leave your politics at home.