Dell: "Beware of imitations, buy a real 2GHz machine, a Pentium 4"

[johndoe52]

<< The only real problem i have with AMD right now is their PR rating system. They are almost trying to defraud the public by using this scheme. Let me give an example.

Ford makes a new Mustang that has a v6 that has produces 425 amount of HP and gives it a 0-60 of 5.0. Chevy comes out with their new corvette that has a v8 that has produces 400 amount of HP and gives it a 0-60 of 5.0. Now should Ford call their car the Mustang v8+ ?

If you dont like that...try this.

Ford makes a new Cobra that has a V8 and prduces 400hp with a curb weight of 3000lbs. Chevy makes a Covette that produces 435hp but weights 3500lbs. Both cars have a 0-60 of 5.0. Should ford sell the car to the public as a Cobra 455+hp car. Sure it performs the exact same as the corvette!! Or is it really the build of the car (weight) that is what helps the performance?

Now remember folks, a cars performance isn't strictly based on HP....there are many other factors. But almost all car makers publish their peak HP ratings to attract buyers. If Ford started a new PR rating system where they bumped up their peak HP rating based on it's performance (known that there are MANY other factors to a cars performance).... is this not considered lying to the consumer.

It's a total misrepresentation of the product. It is perfectly fine for AMD to tell the public that their 1.5ghz performs like a 1.8/1.9 Intel, but to call their product a 1800+ isn't exactly right. They are misleading certain unsuspecting customers. Plus they are setting up retailers and other places to flat out lie to the unknowing consumer.

"Yes man, this is AMD's new 2100mhz chip!" >>



You make some good points but cars have been around for quite some time. Even the most uneducated person knows what they want in a car. Cars aren't all about how fast can they get to 60, like gas mileage. Computers on the other hand haven't been around as long and there are so many people that don't know jack about them. Nor do they care. I bet there are still people that go to the store and buy a computer cause the case was pretty. Now for those people the only thing they understand is numbers. The higher the better. How would amd be able to compete with out the rating system. I don't like that sales people flat out lie to me when i go to the store but I consider myself to be a informed consumer. I didn' t like the rating system at first but I understand what it was meant to do.

 

[JohnnyPC]

Well let's not carried away with spreading nonsense like this....



<< -They're tech support that the customer is ultimately paying for is worse than 3rd party free tech support. My friend who bought a Dell comes to me for help, and I'm just a newbie. >>



Does the support suck or is it just that your friend would rather you come and help than have to spend time on the phone. Many of my client RAVE about how helpful Dell support can be. Sure there's going to be the exception but if the norm were anything but satisfactory, they wouldn't be the market leader. Some people are just hard to please...



<< -The case is proprietary. They make very nice cases, but try putting another motherboard in it. Suppose yours dies giving you the opportunity to upgrade for the same price as replacement... ooops... sorry... you can't put another mobo in it! They'd be better off building cheap cases if they're not gonna make them upgradeable. >>



Funny - I just replaced a motherboard in a DELL with an ASUS unit...fit perfect. Sure some might be of a different form factor but nothing "proprietary"....that went away with Packard Bell...



<< -Poor Sales/ delivery; I've heard of computers being left in the back of trucks, orders cancelled without notifying customer, half hour + waits to speak to someone about an existing order. >>



How about my client that just ordered a new Dell and got it in 4 days. Poor delivery is once again and exception and not the norm. Of course there will be the case that things get lost, mis-shipped, mis-picked etc...it's not always Dell's issue. Whenever I call Dell, sure sometimes I have to wait, and want to know some feature/benefits that I don't alread feel comfortable with, they are knowledgable and steer me right 9 times out of 10...



<< Hey,... if you want to go with industry leaders... be my guest >>



And by the looks of it, MANY people have and will...Get a clue! Thank god for Dell and their market share for without a true leader in the industry, things would certainly not have the overall general direction that the industry needs...especially in this time when technology is so flat. Not everybody is a tech and has the ability, time or interest to do this stuff themselves. Stop whining about what big bad Dell hasn't done for you lately and look at the bigger picture.

The whole topic of this thread remains sad in that market leader Dell has felt the need to resort to a marketing ploy that slams an obviously good product like AMD even when nobody else (OEMs) is even using it...

 

[Gonad the Barbarian]

<< The only real problem i have with AMD right now is their PR rating system. They are almost trying to defraud the public by using this scheme. Let me give an example.

Ford makes a new Mustang that has a v6 that has produces 425 amount of HP and gives it a 0-60 of 5.0. Chevy comes out with their new corvette that has a v8 that has produces 400 amount of HP and gives it a 0-60 of 5.0. Now should Ford call their car the Mustang v8+ ? >>



0-60 times actually mean something to the average consumer. Can you say the same for a computer benchmark?



<< If you dont like that...try this.

Ford makes a new Cobra that has a V8 and prduces 400hp with a curb weight of 3000lbs. Chevy makes a Covette that produces 435hp but weights 3500lbs. Both cars have a 0-60 of 5.0. Should ford sell the car to the public as a Cobra 455+hp car. Sure it performs the exact same as the corvette!! Or is it really the build of the car (weight) that is what helps the performance? >>



Again, they don't have to, they can sell it as a 5 second 0-60 car.



<< Now remember folks, a cars performance isn't strictly based on HP....there are many other factors. But almost all car makers publish their peak HP ratings to attract buyers. If Ford started a new PR rating system where they bumped up their peak HP rating based on it's performance (known that there are MANY other factors to a cars performance).... is this not considered lying to the consumer. >>



AMD isn't changing the defenition of a MHz. 1 horsepower in one car is the exact same as 1 horsepower in any other. It IS a measure of power. The Mhz is NOT.



<< It's a total misrepresentation of the product. It is perfectly fine for AMD to tell the public that their 1.5ghz performs like a 1.8/1.9 Intel, but to call their product a 1800+ isn't exactly right. They are misleading certain unsuspecting customers. Plus they are setting up retailers and other places to flat out lie to the unknowing consumer.

"Yes man, this is AMD's new 2100mhz chip!" >>



It's not a misrepresentation at all. They are model numbers, not a reflection of MHz. If a retailer considers it the same as a MHz rating, THEY are the ones misrepresenting the product.

AMD is basically trying to establish a standard in measuring CPU power, just like horsepower is a standard in measuring engine power.

I'll even take this a little further. Say the horsepower measurement and 0-60 times were never invented. The only indication of an engine's power was it's peak RPM. Ford comes out with a car that hits 5000 RPM's and is fast as hell. Chevy comes out with a car that hits 6000 RPM's, but had to make it slower than the Ford to do it. Chevy markets this car as the 'fastest' simply because it will hit 6000 RPM's. Who is misleading consumers now?

 

[Dreadogg]

As bad as it might sound it is a awsome marketing stragety! I dont support this but it is the facts this will work but who really cares unless you were silly enought to buy stock in AMD! Intel owns the market its just the facts it will take alot to compete with them! The public is just stupid when it comes to PC's and processors, we all know this! Look on the bright side this will keep AMD's prices down!

 

[LikeLinus]

Sorry man, but theres some flaws in this way of thinking


<<0-60 times actually mean something to the average consumer. Can you say the same for a computer benchmark?>>

Yes i think it actually does. Have you seen the Marketing stuff being passed around by each company with benchmarks on them? Not everyone, but alot of people go online to look at benchmark results to judge a computer. The same as people check out motor trend or car and driver. Admitted not everyone uses these things, but some people do

<<Again, they don't have to, they can sell it as a 5 second 0-60 car.>>

And again, AMD doesnt have to reinvent the wheel here. They sat there and played the mhz war and they are the ones who started it. They dropped the 1ghz processor on Intel a few days before, just to say they were the first to 1ghz. Now they turn around and come out with a PR scheme because Intel "plays ball" and releases the P4 with 20 pipeline stages that can reach a very high mhz rating, while "sacrificing" a bit of performance in compairison? It's all about money.


<<AMD isn't changing the defenition of a MHz. 1 horsepower in one car is the exact same as 1 horsepower in any other. It IS a measure of power. The Mhz is NOT.

AMD is basically trying to establish a standard in measuring CPU power, just like horsepower is a standard in measuring engine power. >>

No AMD is not trying to change what Mhz mean, but THEY are trying to establish a "standard" of measuring CPU power. This is not some scientific researched deal that an 3rd party or organization is creating! AMD is creating it themselves with themselves in mind! Can you tell us what exactly their so called "PR" rating scheme is based off of? Is it a scientific calculation of various benchmarks? Does anyone really? Nope! This new "established standard" would be like Ford trying to come up with a new performance measurement cause they were getting beat by Chevy in the HP wars! You wouldn't consider that wrong..or lame?


<<It's not a misrepresentation at all. They are model numbers, not a reflection of MHz. If a retailer considers it the same as a MHz rating, THEY are the ones misrepresenting the product. >>

Well they may not be to you, but damn well sure AMD knows what they are doing. As stated, this is some made up modeling system intened to not only position their chips against Intels higher clocked CPU's, but to confuse the "Joe Blows" in this world who see an "AMD 2100+". Any marketing person can tell you that.

Also AMD was doing just fine without the PR rating system with their Athlon line. They were taking Marketshare away from Intel and starting to get their foot in the door. AMD didnt NEED to do this. Do you know why they did it? Can you actually tell me why they really needed to do this? Do you really think its cause they want the public to be "aware" Don't kid yourself

 

[Gonad the Barbarian]

AMD's rating system is based off its own previous Tbird line. An Athlon XP 1700 has the same performance as an TBird clocked at 1.7GHz. And every company takes advantage of the ignorance of consumers. Intel did it by sacrificing performance for 'speed.' AMD is doing it with the rating system. The difference is, AMD is actually being somewhat honest about performance while Intel is hiding behind its higher MHz. And I won't even go into the premium someone pays for those higher MHz's even though they bring the same performance as a 'slower' and cheaper AMD chip.

And if you are going to rebut one of my posts, do the whole thing. You conviently left off the last paragraph.

 

[AGodspeed]

Also AMD was doing just fine without the PR rating system with their Athlon line. They were taking Marketshare away from Intel and starting to get their foot in the door. AMD didnt NEED to do this. Do you know why they did it? Can you actually tell me why they really needed to do this?

AMD was hardly doing "fine" without the PR rating LikeLinus. Don't you even remember Q3 of last year? AMD's ASP's sucked hard arse then. The model rating system (introduced the first week of Q4) helped bring AMD's ASP's way up. In other words, AMD still does need the model numbering system; it's the best way to justify their ASP's and to educate people that MHz isn't everything. Go look up AMD's marketing term "Quantispeed" that accompanies each and every AXP OEM system sold on the market, it's actually quite a good explanation of why MHz isn't everything in determining performance.

Do you really think its cause they want the public to be "aware" Don't kid yourself

You can say the same thing about any company. Intel, AMD, nVidia, ATi, etc. What's your point?

 

[Sunner]

<< Is it a scientific calculation of various benchmarks? Does anyone really? Nope! >>


Actually they have information about what benchmarks make up the model numbers on their site for everyone to see.

Dont remember the address, but if you go look for it you should be able to find it with ease.

 

[FishTankX]

You know, there's a painfully obvious solution to this.

Just base chip performance on MFLOPS.

Then we can see what Intel does.

Or even better, MIPS! Ahahahahaha..

Oh yeah, and leave out SSE2.
That'll get intel Creamed.

Still, I like my 1.7GHZ Willy, Sure he** of alot faster than my PIII700, and now I have the northwood upgrade path. (I told my friend that I was better off with a P4 than an Athlon, and this was before the northwood was anounced. I knew Intel would have to catch up somehow.

But i've got a good idea on how to make a performance rating system.

Just call the processors Amd Athlon2100+ 1733MHZ. Then show benchmarks on the back of the box, showing an Athlon creaming a P4 at science mark and Zip operations. That should keep the average consumer happy and keep dell's big mouth shut.

 

[skace]

Car analogies....haha. I love when analogies are drawn that arn't really analogies at all - they just look like one on the surface.

Hows this for an analogy LikeLinus?

Let's say people buy cars based strictly on Horse Power. Meaning if I were to go to a dealer and I had the money, I would simply ask for their highest HP model and buy it without a care in the world, knowing that it is the best they currently offer. Why must we start by making this comparison? Because your analogy was drawn between cars, which are complete packages, and chipsets, which are but 1 component in a complete package known as a computer.

Ok, now lets say Ford makes a new Mustang specifically designed to get massive ammounts of HP at a decieving loss of performance. Their new Mustang reports 1200 HP and no one really cares how they did this, they just know this must now be the top of the line due to how they rate their cars. Unlike the customers, Chevy obviously can guess relatively quickly how Ford did it and why Ford did it. This leaves Chevy stuck in a position where the only spec that people base their new car purchases on has been outrageously skewed and abused. They know their only option is to either join the bandwagon and make a similar car with outrageously skewed HP or start to label their cars based on how they possibly compete against this new rating. They've tested the new Mustang, they know it doesn't even beat their current corvette (or even the older Mustangs), so they decide to label their new Corvette: "Corvette 1300+". Is Chevy's new label decieving? Perhaps, but if you read the spec sheet it reports that it is still a 400 HP car. They havn't relabeled the HP, only changed how they label the car.

Now who is worse off? In my book, neither is. They both have their hand in the cookie jar known as customer deception. The deception started when a common statistic was twisted because of its known reaction with the buying audience. Previous to the Mustang change, people could wager their first born on the fact that if the car had more HP it would perform better. But Ford used the trust people have in HP to trick them into something that doesn't actually perform better. Then Chevy tries to trick people by changing where they would usually label their HP in the name of the car with a fictional number they decided to make up which remotely matches competitors HP. Although their new car does perform up the expectations of their new labeling scheme, it is still decieving people to some degree.

Did either company actually do anything wrong? Nope.

Now, I'm sure this analogy probably has loops. But I'm guessing not as many as your original one did.

 

[LikeLinus]

skace - apparently you are missing the total point of my post. My analogies were just that, analogies. They were not meant to be flawless and perfect. They were just meant to give you a general idea of what i was getting at. Some people instead of getting at what my point was, wanna sit here and debate my analogy..heh.

AGodspeed - Ok admitted that it appears that AMD is doing much better after their PR was implimented. But you must remember one thing. During that 2nd and 3rd quarter the market was taking such a hit that all companies across the board were hurting bad. Intel was hurting, dell was, chipmakers. Hell the prices of ram were $29 for 256mb of DDR? I think the economy and what was going on in the world lead more to their loss of money than anything. The market was turning about the time PR was released. Might be a coincidence, might not

<<You can say the same thing about any company. Intel, AMD, nVidia, ATi, etc. What's your point?> > No doubt, you are absolutely correct. I said this in my post It's all about money. And thats exactly what every company is after. AMD has NOT introduced this to "enlighten" consumers. But my problem on this board is the people think AMD is a holier than thou company cause they make a kick ass chip and priced for hobbiest. Intel does not (yet the p4 is still a sweet chip), but people wanna trash it and claim AMD some king of the chip world.

Gonad the Barbarian - "AMD's rating system is based off its own previous Tbird line. An Athlon XP 1700 has the same performance as an TBird clocked at 1.7GHz. " And hence the serious flaw in this whole PR rating system. They are basing the performance of their own chip, off their own chip!!!! How is THAT helping customers understand that mhz is not the key thing to look at when judging the performance of a chip? So they are just making up a PR rating scheme based off their old chip? So what happens when newer chips that come out using a totally new architecture? Are they going to make up a new PR when the 64bit chips come out? Or are they going to use the old 32bit PR system?? Does this make ANY sense at all?

Check out the mobile 1300mhz Athlon 4. It has a PR of 1500. So...

Athlon 4 1500 = 1300mhz/100fsb/SDRAM
Athlon XP 1500 = 1333mhz/133fsb/DDR

Ok does ANYONE see a problem with this?

And what about the scaling? A 1333mhz AthlonXP has a PR of ~12% higher. Yet a 1733mhz AthlonXP has a PR of ~22%! How does that work?

Another Elite Member PM'd me that bit of info above. I had no clue that the PR % changed like that. So it appears that their PR is on a sliding scale (because the architecture and the chips are the exact same, they have no reason to rise from 12-22%, they should be kept on an even scale with each other).

Ok for everyone who doesnt understand. I have no problems with AMD (cause i also use them), absolutely none of than the people around here not undestanding the true meaning of their PR scale. It is NOT to educate people on the actual performance of chips. If an unbias and independant group or organization would make a true CPU benchmark and PR system, that would kick butt. AMD has NOT done that and people here are uneducated in this fact and must really believe AMD.

To end...AMD's Chips (since athlon) kick butt. Theres no doubt about it. But they are still trying to sell chips...and it's all about the $$$$


Don't be a sheep

 

[LikeLinus]

Oh yeah, just a follow up to Dell's Customer Service. My friend works for the Nashville branch of Dell and their CS has gone to absolute sh!t. They have been keeping temp employees WAY too long and not hiring them full time and training them. They've been "laying off" the true full time employees because they dont have to pay medical and 401k to temp employees (and the fact that their incomes are lower). This fact alone has ruined their CS department that used to be just great. Now they have half wit morons answering the phone that have no real clue about computers. They do a 2 week training but have no true computer knowlege. Reading from a computer screen and guessing at problems doesnt help.

He does SBS and he said he gets calls all the time from people who are pissed after they purchase their system cause they call tech support about something small, and it's like dealing with idiots. The problem is he's so busy all the time and he can't help them (he does sometimes if its small). They get even more pissed and thats what sucks.

Dells become too large of a company. Thats basically what has happened.

 

[Sunner]

I think we should all agree to disagree, or you're gonna be making all kinds of wierd anologies until the thread gets locked.

Woody kicks as and AXP kicks ass, who gives a $hit about what they're called really?
You might as well start complaining about all the fancy "Netburst" and "Quantispeed" stuff while you're at it

 

[JellyBaby]

<< Dells become too large of a company. Thats basically what has happened. >>

There are plenty of other options out there that will bend over backwards for you in the service department. They may be smaller outfits but so what? There's no real need to feed the Dell Corporate Empire.

 

[spanner]

haha, Dell is just getting scared of the HP+compaq merger. I hope Dell gets its ass kicked for a while, maybe they will reconsider AMD (I am sure they will once hammer kicks in). Dell is a good company but its Ego has grown out of proportion and they are losing it. As far as the future goes, I put my money on Hp+compaq. One reason I really hate dell is that rigged survey they did a while back on AMD cpus, they had no intention of using AMD.

 

[Degenerate]

Well if people think that the ad is Bs then i'll tell you another story in taiwan. Over here, many CPu vendors name their XP's anf P4 using the same "G" ie. 1.9G for the 1900+ and 1.9Ghz P4. What do you think? same thing.

 

[Siddhartha]

Why is Dell doing this? Do they have a competitor which uses AMD and is taking market share away from them?

 

[Diable]

No. There probably doing because of the H/P-Compaq merger since there the only two of the big five box makers(Dell, IBM, Gateway, H/P and Compaq)that still sells systems with AMD processors in the US.