Dell AMD boxes vastly cheaper than Intel
"All in all, I think the AMD based Dells are a very attractive
proposition. For the vast majority of people out there, the extra money
saved is well worth it, I can see why Dell went AMD now. This is going
to be a very interesting Christmas season with prices like these, AMD
will do very well indeed. µ"
http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=34392

On 14 Sep 2006 15:51:27 -0700, "bbbl67" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>Dell AMD boxes vastly cheaper than Intel
>"All in all, I think the AMD based Dells are a very attractive
>proposition. For the vast majority of people out there, the extra money
>saved is well worth it, I can see why Dell went AMD now. This is going
>to be a very interesting Christmas season with prices like these, AMD
>will do very well indeed. µ"
>http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=34392

At least we AMD DIYers have a reference now for the kind of junk Dell is
selling.;-)

--
Rgds, George Macdonald

bbbl67 wrote:

>Dell AMD boxes vastly cheaper than Intel
>"All in all, I think the AMD based Dells are a very attractive
>proposition. For the vast majority of people out there, the extra money
>saved is well worth it, I can see why Dell went AMD now. This is going
>to be a very interesting Christmas season with prices like these, AMD
>will do very well indeed. µ"
>http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=34392

I wonder what chipsets those cheap AMD boxes are using...

On Fri, 15 Sep 2006 08:01:20 -0500, chrisv <(E-Mail Removed)>
wrote:

>bbbl67 wrote:
>
>>Dell AMD boxes vastly cheaper than Intel
>>"All in all, I think the AMD based Dells are a very attractive
>>proposition. For the vast majority of people out there, the extra money
>>saved is well worth it, I can see why Dell went AMD now. This is going
>>to be a very interesting Christmas season with prices like these, AMD
>>will do very well indeed. µ"
>>http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=34392
>
>I wonder what chipsets those cheap AMD boxes are using...

"NVIDIA GeForce 6150 LE Integrated Graphics GPU" - as stated on Dell
config page
http://configure.us.dell.com/dellsto...=MLB1801&s=biz

NNN

On 14 Sep 2006 15:51:27 -0700, "bbbl67" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>Dell AMD boxes vastly cheaper than Intel
>"All in all, I think the AMD based Dells are a very attractive
>proposition. For the vast majority of people out there, the extra money
>saved is well worth it, I can see why Dell went AMD now. This is going
>to be a very interesting Christmas season with prices like these, AMD
>will do very well indeed. µ"
>http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=34392

Dell seems to just have learned what we around here knew for many
years: by using AMD you save a bundle, and in most cases still get a
faster box.
;-)
The boxes are decent for the target audience. The only thing that
doesn't look good is the memory - it's limited to 533. But this would
hobble Intel boxes, especially Netbust based, even more than AMD ones.
While expecting 800 from Dull in their value line desktops would be a
stretch, they should've offered 667 at least as an option.

NNN

(E-Mail Removed) wrote:
> The boxes are decent for the target audience. The only thing that
> doesn't look good is the memory - it's limited to 533. But this would
> hobble Intel boxes, especially Netbust based, even more than AMD ones.
> While expecting 800 from Dull in their value line desktops would be a
> stretch, they should've offered 667 at least as an option.

Well, since the memory controller is on the CPU, shouldn't it be just a
simple matter to enable 667 and 800, and even higher speeds, just by
upgrading a BIOS? Maybe Dell will enable the higher speeds later, when
those speed bins become more affordable? Dell has to save money
somewhere, so it's probably got a big inventory of 533Mhz DDR2 sitting
in a warehouse somewhere? Oh wait, scratch that, Dell is so efficient,
it doesn't keep an inventory. :-)

Yousuf Khan

--
There is no failure, only delayed success

(E-Mail Removed) wrote:
> The boxes are decent for the target audience. The only thing that
> doesn't look good is the memory - it's limited to 533. But this would
> hobble Intel boxes, especially Netbust based, even more than AMD ones.
> While expecting 800 from Dull in their value line desktops would be a
> stretch, they should've offered 667 at least as an option.

Well, since the memory controller is on the CPU, shouldn't it be just a
simple matter to enable 667 and 800, and even higher speeds, just by
upgrading a BIOS? Maybe Dell will enable the higher speeds later, when
those speed bins become more affordable? Dell has to save money
somewhere, so it's probably got a big inventory of 533Mhz DDR2 sitting
in a warehouse somewhere? Oh wait, scratch that, Dell is so efficient,
it doesn't keep an inventory. :-)

Yousuf Khan

--
There is no failure, only delayed success

George Macdonald wrote:
> On 14 Sep 2006 15:51:27 -0700, "bbbl67" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
>> Dell AMD boxes vastly cheaper than Intel
>> "All in all, I think the AMD based Dells are a very attractive
>> proposition. For the vast majority of people out there, the extra money
>> saved is well worth it, I can see why Dell went AMD now. This is going
>> to be a very interesting Christmas season with prices like these, AMD
>> will do very well indeed. µ"
>> http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=34392
>
> At least we AMD DIYers have a reference now for the kind of junk Dell is
> selling.;-)

It's funny, one of the anal-yst firms, Goldman-Sachs, is commenting that
the extent of support for AMD processors is less than expected, because
it doesn't think there's enough models being introduced. I guess it's
thinking that it's gotta be like the Intel model where you usually need
a different motherboard depending on whether it's Celeron, Pentium, or
Core, and even whenever new speed grades are introduced. Dell is only
introducing two models with AMD processors, the standard-sized E521 and
the slimline C521, and that's it. What GS doesn't seem to understand is
that the same system is available with everything from a Sempron, right
upto X2's (and probably FX'es too, but they aren't offered on these
models). So why would Dell need to offer anymore models?

Yousuf Khan

"Goldman Sachs notes that while there has been continued speculation
regarding the magnitude of AMD's (NYSE:AMD) penetration of Dell
(NASDAQELL), they believe that Dell's initial rollout of AMD-based
products suggests that expectations may have gotten ahead of reality, at
least for the remainder of 2006. Dell's new Dimension products represent
a very small percentage of its overall business. Further, while AMD's
pending notebook relationship with Dell will drive incremental share
gains, they believe that if the extent to which Dell is currently using
AMD in desktops is similar to what the firm can expect in notebooks,
AMD's market share is unlikely to increase as meaningfully as current
expectations suggest. To that end, the firm is republishing their recent
analysis which illustrates that AMD's share gains at Dell/IBM in
2006/2007 will likely be more than offset by Intel's gains at HP, the
white box market, and the gaming enthusiast market."
http://www1.investorvillage.com/smbd...msg&mid=436912


--
There is no failure, only delayed success

On Fri, 15 Sep 2006 13:44:41 -0400, Yousuf Khan <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>George Macdonald wrote:
>> On 14 Sep 2006 15:51:27 -0700, "bbbl67" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>>
>>> Dell AMD boxes vastly cheaper than Intel
>>> "All in all, I think the AMD based Dells are a very attractive
>>> proposition. For the vast majority of people out there, the extra money
>>> saved is well worth it, I can see why Dell went AMD now. This is going
>>> to be a very interesting Christmas season with prices like these, AMD
>>> will do very well indeed. µ"
>>> http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=34392
>>
>> At least we AMD DIYers have a reference now for the kind of junk Dell is
>> selling.;-)
>
>It's funny, one of the anal-yst firms, Goldman-Sachs, is commenting that
>the extent of support for AMD processors is less than expected, because
>it doesn't think there's enough models being introduced. I guess it's
>thinking that it's gotta be like the Intel model where you usually need
>a different motherboard depending on whether it's Celeron, Pentium, or
>Core, and even whenever new speed grades are introduced. Dell is only
>introducing two models with AMD processors, the standard-sized E521 and
>the slimline C521, and that's it. What GS doesn't seem to understand is
>that the same system is available with everything from a Sempron, right
>upto X2's (and probably FX'es too, but they aren't offered on these
>models). So why would Dell need to offer anymore models?

They do have a point though: I have trouble believeing that the 305W P/S in
the E521 can handle a X2 5000+, a real video card and a couple of HDDs.
OTOH Dell can leave the higher end market to Alienware maybe.

The castrated "Lite" version of the Nforce 430/6150 chipset is a perfect
illustration of why to avoid this garbage.

I just hope Dell is not going to use AMD as a foil to show off Intel's
"strengths". I've said several times that AMD would be better off without
Dell - they only devalue the product. To the casual buyer this is bottom
of the barrel - people often figure a few extra $$ spent is "worth it".

--
Rgds, George Macdonald

On Fri, 15 Sep 2006 12:57:40 -0400, Yousuf Khan <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>(E-Mail Removed) wrote:
>> The boxes are decent for the target audience. The only thing that
>> doesn't look good is the memory - it's limited to 533. But this would
>> hobble Intel boxes, especially Netbust based, even more than AMD ones.
>> While expecting 800 from Dull in their value line desktops would be a
>> stretch, they should've offered 667 at least as an option.
>
>Well, since the memory controller is on the CPU, shouldn't it be just a
>simple matter to enable 667 and 800, and even higher speeds, just by
>upgrading a BIOS? Maybe Dell will enable the higher speeds later, when
>those speed bins become more affordable? Dell has to save money
>somewhere, so it's probably got a big inventory of 533Mhz DDR2 sitting
>in a warehouse somewhere? Oh wait, scratch that, Dell is so efficient,
>it doesn't keep an inventory. :-)

If you look closely at the DDR2 market, nobody is selling a PC2-6400 DIMM
which requires less than 1.9V and there's only one or two of those - most
want 2.1(5)V or more. Even PC2-5300 is pushing it at 1.9V for many mfrs.
The integrated mbrd I looked at as a possible build for a family member,
was limited to 1.9V - not worth the risk IMO. Even non-integrated mbrds,
like the Asus M2N-E (~$90.), which has only a 4-step VR maxed at 1.95V, are
a big risk for PC2-6400.

Anybody buying that Dell POS with a view to upgrade is going to be
seriously disappointed. I'm still puzzled as to why they disabled the
nForce 1Gb network interface and added a 100Mb Broadcom chip... but then
they also disabled the 2xPATA interfaces.<ugh>

--
Rgds, George Macdonald