By: Aaron Spink (aaronspink.delete@this.notearthlink.net), August 18, 2014 3:58 pm
Room: Moderated Discussions
dmcq (dmcq.delete@this.fano.co.uk) on August 18, 2014 5:50 am wrote:
> A lot of companies really do care and would like to be rid of Intel. But they are the ones making the
> computers rather than the ones buying the computers and they are in a competitive market. The most they
> can do is try out alternatives. If an alternative works they will be happy to go with it, there will be
> no loyalty to Intel. However the barriers to an alternative working are pretty large, Intel has served
> the customers well over the years and they aren't going to go to something new without a great deal of
> convincing. To paraphrase what used to be said about IBM, no one gets fired for buying Intel.
>
I'm not even really convinced of that. If you look at the effective "assemblers and service partners", yes, they would like to have more value add, but the actual places where ARM server CPU manufacturers are targeting are pretty much the places where the "assemblers and service partners" have generally already been pushed out of the market by their customers.
Take something like AMD's Seattle which is aimed squarely at MemCached workloads, the vast majority of the MemCached systems are basically independent of "assemblers and service partners". The end user customer is generally specifying the whole system and outsourcing the manufacturing to the lowest bidder.
In other parts of the server market where the vast majority of the "assemblers and service partners" compete, going to ARM servers doesn't change anything biz wise. In fact, there generally is less room for differentiation in those markets.
I still think its more of a case of wanting leverage than actually wanting any change. AMD has failed so badly to be competitive that Intel can pretty much dictate terms ATM. The simple truth is that there is very little value add regardless of if the CPU is Intel or ARM. Combined with the reality that most of the companies have outsourced all their manufacturing and R&D, they are pretty much between a rock and a hard place. The CPU used isn't going to change that. And the reality is that it is only going to get worse over time as more and more functionality gets integrated.
> A lot of companies really do care and would like to be rid of Intel. But they are the ones making the
> computers rather than the ones buying the computers and they are in a competitive market. The most they
> can do is try out alternatives. If an alternative works they will be happy to go with it, there will be
> no loyalty to Intel. However the barriers to an alternative working are pretty large, Intel has served
> the customers well over the years and they aren't going to go to something new without a great deal of
> convincing. To paraphrase what used to be said about IBM, no one gets fired for buying Intel.
>
I'm not even really convinced of that. If you look at the effective "assemblers and service partners", yes, they would like to have more value add, but the actual places where ARM server CPU manufacturers are targeting are pretty much the places where the "assemblers and service partners" have generally already been pushed out of the market by their customers.
Take something like AMD's Seattle which is aimed squarely at MemCached workloads, the vast majority of the MemCached systems are basically independent of "assemblers and service partners". The end user customer is generally specifying the whole system and outsourcing the manufacturing to the lowest bidder.
In other parts of the server market where the vast majority of the "assemblers and service partners" compete, going to ARM servers doesn't change anything biz wise. In fact, there generally is less room for differentiation in those markets.
I still think its more of a case of wanting leverage than actually wanting any change. AMD has failed so badly to be competitive that Intel can pretty much dictate terms ATM. The simple truth is that there is very little value add regardless of if the CPU is Intel or ARM. Combined with the reality that most of the companies have outsourced all their manufacturing and R&D, they are pretty much between a rock and a hard place. The CPU used isn't going to change that. And the reality is that it is only going to get worse over time as more and more functionality gets integrated.
