Does anyone know how 4x4 will be priced? AMD claims there will be models well under $1000. What does that mean anyways? $1000 for CPUs, or $1000 for the entire system?
I seriously doubt AMD will release 4x4 at such low prices. That is because that will grossly undercut their own 2P Opteron sells. Here are some facts:
1. AMD's operating margins are lower than those of Intel.
2. As percentage of revenue, 2P servers matter more to AMD than to Intel
3. ASP lift that AMD gets from Opterons is higher than the ASP lift Intel gets from Xeon.
4. The highest-end desktop model that currently AMD is selling, for all practical purposes, is X2 3800+, which you get for $159 with a free motherboard. This implies, AMD desperately needs the margins it is getting on its Opterons.
5. ATI acquisition is putting strain on AMD's cache flow.
Considering all this, how can AMD kill their own 2P business? Now if Intel prices Kentsfield at prices that undercut Opterons, then AMD will be forced to price 4x4 that way. But why would they price 4x4 that way, without being forced, when they desperately need the margins the cash-cow Opterons are generating?
4x4 won't undercut 4P and 8P systems, but those alone are not sufficient to provide AMD with enough cash to stay in green (this is a guess, not a fact).
BTW, I do not expect even Intel to undercut Opterons (or Xeons) with Kentsfield. If they do that, they might kill that business forever. And with Woodcrest, they at least have some hope of regaining market share. If the market is killed, no one stands to gain. The likes of Google will immediately jump onto 4x4 or Kentsfield to build cheap "servers". Google doesn't care about reliability. All it cares about is performance/watt/$. And there are many others who care about exactly that.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
18 comments:
No Disrespect, but again you are wrong. Let me tell you why 4x4 is no competition AT ALL for 2P Opteron market.
Most Intel lovers or un-educated people think 4x4 hurts 2P Opteron because all they look at is "they both have 2 sockets" -- That is a HUGE mistake. Let's compare 2P Opteron platforms to 4x4 platforms.
2P Opteron:
PCI-X & Registered DIMM's
Up to 8 RAM Sticks per Socket
Can have Multiple Chipsets
4x4:
No PCI-X & Unregistered DIMM's
Only 2 RAM Sticks Per Socket
Limited to Single Chipset
As you can see, it becomes VERY clear why 4x4 and 2P Opteron cannot compete. People who buy 2P Opteron want PCI-X for RAID devices and other peripherals. They also buy it for the added RAM capacity and the ability to have that extra bit of parity on RAM.
4x4 has 2 sticks of RAM per Socket, no registered DIMM's but is SLI capable and is great for enthusiasts.
A complete 4x4 system will be had for $1,000. AMD wants 4x4 to be for enthusiasts, but also cheaper than 2P Opteron systems.
Chips, you should head over to the RubyWorks Forums (Forumz.RubyWorks.net) -- You can promote your blog there and post some new information as well, I don't have a problem with blog promotion.
Mike, Google has officially gone on record claiming that they want cheap hardware, they can live with unreliability. There software is more than capable of taking care of online failures. So arguably, they wouldn't mind using non-registered DIMMs. In fact, most enthusists go for registered/ECC DIMMs just because server chipsets force them to. 4x4 will give these people another choice, and there is no reason why they won't buy it.
As far PCI-X, why can't RAID controllers be put on PCIe (this is a question)? PCIe has better bandwidth/latency/retry capabilities. PCI-X vs PCIe is same as FSB vs HT. PCIe x4 link can outperform PCI-X, and there are already x16 links available on desktops. The RAID controller on my desktop is a PCIe device, and it supports upto 8 SATA 3Gbps disks.
As per 2 sticks of RAM per socket, it gives max capacity of 8 GB. Now most volume in 2P servers is in 4GB and 8GB range (Intel likes to claim it is 4, AMD likes to claim it is 8--because of their respective strengths).
Do we have a precedent for a cheap, yet decently-performing 2P system, after x86 server market started showing any volume?
My workstation at my job is a 2P Xeon (Paxville-based--go figure), and I would swap it with a QX6700 in a heartbeat, if the QX6700 turned out to be a cheaper option.
Never mind Core2, you are too much in love with Intel to get it.
I'm assuming that most people use XP Home. Last I heard, Vista's going to be released January? For 4x4 you'd need a new motherboard, new OS that would overlap with Vista[unless you already have XP Pro], 4 sticks of RAM, new CPUs)
"I'm assuming that most people use XP Home."
I'm assuming you're an Intel Fanboy who knows nothing and should shut his face.
I assume you resort to name calling once you run out of facts:)
"I assume you resort to name calling once you run out of facts:)"
No, but I can get pissed off about things and than I go off, it only happens when I read or hear something I don't like. Usually I'm a cool headed guy in person.
Mike, when was the last time you had lost an argument and had taken it with civility?
Initially I was thinking of volunteering for being a coauthor on your blog (I am not assuming you would have selected me or anything). But precisely because of your namecalling, I decided against it. When namecalling begins, intelligent discussion ends.
You still haven't answered my question: why does PCI-X matter. The world is moving to PCIe--a far better interconnect than PCI-X.
"Initially I was thinking of volunteering for being a coauthor on your blog (I am not assuming you would have selected me or anything). But precisely because of your namecalling, I decided against it. When namecalling begins, intelligent discussion ends."
I can be a hot-head, so what, just proof I'm as real and True as they come playa.
Peep this though: www.InformativeOpinions.com -- you should post there, it'll have better recognition and gain you more publicity.
"You still haven't answered my question: why does PCI-X matter. The world is moving to PCIe--a far better interconnect than PCI-X."
PCI-E is far better than PCI-X, but in an SLI system w/ high performance storage -- PCI-X + 2x PCI-E is better than PCI-E x1 and the other used for the RAID.
Ok you've admitted to being a hot head MMM, at least address why you name called in the first place, in regards to XP Home having more penetration:)
"Ok you've admitted to being a hot head MMM, at least address why you name called in the first place, in regards to XP Home having more penetration:)"
People who use XP Home, likely can't afford any high-end system such as Kentsfield or 4x4, so to put it nicely, your comment was...uhm....poop
PCI-E is far better than PCI-X, but in an SLI system w/ high performance storage -- PCI-X + 2x PCI-E is better than PCI-E x1 and the other used for the RAID.
I do not know about other chipsets, bull all of Intel's newer chipsets have onboard RAID (Matrix Storage) support. And for most consumers, I think that is sufficient. The RAID performance might matter in database backend where disk operations are very common and are in critical path. But for work-stations, small-time web servers, etc., I don't think it matters much. I think my RAID speed today is limited by the speed of the hard drive than by the speed of the RAID itself.
Also, when you are talking about servers, no one wants to install dual SLI or crossfire on them. You can easily use one PCIe x16 for the GFX and the other for add-on RAID.
PCI-E is far better than PCI-X, but in an SLI system w/ high performance storage -- PCI-X + 2x PCI-E is better than PCI-E x1 and the other used for the RAID.
Oh, BTW, few days ago, I read on INQ that the top-end ASUS Core 2 board now has 3 PCIe x16 slots. That can take care of Crossfire AND RAID. There is no reason why there can't be similar 4x4 boards.
"Also, when you are talking about servers, no one wants to install dual SLI or crossfire on them"
I guess you never heard of the Quadro FX 4500 in SLI on Workstations.
I had rather the notion that 4x4 would price two chips at $1,000 and therefore simply replace the current single chip FX price range with 2 chips. I'm not seeing this as $1,000 for a whole system. In fact, my understanding is that AMD will continue to use the FX brand on the 4x4 chips so again this would seem to match that the current FX price.
Also, I'm not so certain about the use of registered memory. A comment was made by one of the AMD executives that this would be true workstation technology. That sounds like registered memory to me. On the other hand, an enthusiast system would seem to need the faster speed of non-registered memory.
Intel's margin was higher in Q4 05 but has not been this year. Intel sold a higher percentage of 4-way servers last year but I'm not so certain they will this year. Actually, the highest end desktop model for AMD would be the X2 4600+ which is priced similarly to E6400. Above this price, C2D prices are better. The ATI acquistion is not really bothering AMD's cash flow. Remember that AMD built FAB 36 on about half of their current revenue.
It's still a bit early to see exactly what their strategy is because we still don't know exactly what defines a 4x4 FX and what the prices will be. However, a starting price for two chips of near $1,000 should leave room for Opteron.
Post a Comment