HP's Pavilion family shows AMD gets equality

HEWLETT PACKARD'S US Pavilion PC Web page makes encouraging reading for AMD. Of the seven retail desktop solutions on offer, four of those are configured with an AMD processor, which is the same as the chip giant.

In that line-up, the cut-off-at-the-knees Intel Celeron processor has found its natural home, as the a500y model is the cheapest Pavilion on offer. However, $15 more buys the AMD Athlon XP powered a510e model, which would feel like picking up the keys for a Porsche instead of a three-wheeled, performance challenged Reliant Robin.

Previously, AMD had been associated with bottom dollar desktop offerings at cheapest cost. It's interesting to note that the tables have been turned.

Considering how HP has positioned the AMD processor based Pavilion offerings against the Intel powered alternatives, if the PC vendor is receiving co-op funding money from Intel, the chip giant has to be wondering what's going on.

First off, the a550e Athlon 64 model takes pride of place in the HP Pavilion line-up. Also, the more favorable language used to describe all the AMD processor based Pavilion solutions must make Intel feel like HP has just given it a good kneeing between the legs and the same measured treatment to its face.

"Leading-edge" and "revolutionary" describes the top Athlon 64 based Pavilion offering (a550e); lesser language describes the P4 powered counterpart (a550y) - "superior" and "powerful". It's the same for the middle-tier offerings - "value and flexibility" for the model based on the Athlon XP processor (a530e), and "entry-level" for the P4 powered solution (a410y). The value offerings are singing the same tune - "great value" for the Athlon XP powered model (a510e) and "budget priced" for the Celeron based alternative (a500y).

It's not just the price which makes the AMD processor based Pavilion offerings more attractive. It's the value that really raises the eyebrow.

When the top P4 Pavilion model (a550y) is configured the same as its Athlon 64 counterpart (a550e), it costs $225 more. So HP's Athlon 64 based PC is not only cheaper to buy, it will probably be cheaper to run over its lifetime because it's not saddled with the fiery Prescott P4 processor, which would proverbially "dim the lights" when the power button is engaged.

The Intel powered mid-tier Pavilion model continues the poor value theme. According to HP, the P4 based a410y model doesn't even ship with a 533 MHz FSB. It has to make do with the same 400 MHz version that the castrated Celeron is saddled with. But that's not all though. Intel Extreme Graphics is another handicap. Extreme in this case is not high performance but low. When it comes time to upgrade the integrated graphics to something far more robust, disappointment will abound because there is no slot for an AGP graphics card. There really has to be something better.

The mid-tier Athlon XP based a530e Pavilion model doesn't suffer the same limitations as its P4 counterpart. AMD hasn't crippled the Athlon XP by lowering the FSB. But HP's config page says the 3200+ model, which has a 200 MHz FSB (400 MHz DDR), ships with 166 MHz PC2700 (333 MHz DDR) memory - an asynchronous FSB and memory setup is not the performance ideal for a Nvidia nForce2 based platform. On the graphics front, the Pavilion machine has the much better performing Nvidia nForce2 dual channel integrated graphics, which thankfully can be upgraded to an AGP graphics card. When the mid-tier Pavilion models are configured as close as possible, the P4 based version costs vastly more - $295.

Looking at the value Pavilion offerings, it's the same story. The snail and hare comparison was given earlier, so it should be understood that the Athlon XP chip is the main component that really differentiates these platforms. So those who want a value PC that has some urgency won't want to be buying a Celeron powered Pavilion. Also, like the mid-tier P4 powered Pavilion, the Celeron based model can't be upgraded to an AGP graphics card. When it's configured the same as its Athlon XP powered counterpart, it again costs more - $65.

The starting prices of the Intel based Pavilion systems are misleading, as it's only when these PCs are configured like their AMD processor based brethren that the difference in cost becomes apparent. When these PCs are configured the same, Intel processor based offerings for top-line, mid-tier, and value offerings cost 17% ($225), 50% ($295), and 11% ($65) more respectively.

With the power and influence that Intel has in the industry, who would have thought that HP would not only be more favorable to AMD in the positioning of its Pavilion solutions, but that the language used to describe those offerings would be forthright as well?

The INQUIRER hasn't been slow when it comes to criticising HP, so praise is in order here. But HP can still do more to make the consumer king. It needs to configure the Intel processor based Pavilion PCs the same as the AMD powered alternatives, so that its customers can immediately see the difference.

But HP is not just being open with its retail customers, it's doing the same with its enterprise customers as well. HP is touting up to 57% better performance for its two-way AMD Opteron powered server than its Intel Xeon based counterpart. And now that its quad Opteron solution is now on sale, HP is claiming "highest 32-bit industry standard performance" and "...the industry's top performing 4-way rack server".

Hoever, HP's Compaq Presario desktop offerings for US retail are favour the chip giant. Four of the six models are configured with an Intel processor. AMD has to be happy with only two. HP's solitary Media Center PC is also configured with an Intel chip as well.

It's the same for HP's US retail notebooks. The seven model Pavilion line-up only has two AMD processor based offerings.

Intel also has a strong presence in HP's notebook, desktop, workstation, and server offerings for the enterprise, but AMD is making inroads in all except the workstation category. The non-workstation offering might change as IBM now touts an AMD Opteron powered solution.

HP and Sun are already touting their AMD Opteron powered servers as Intel Xeon killers. So what would be doubly worrying for the chip giant and Intel only Dell is if the rest of the industry followed the HP Pavilion positioning model for retail PCs. If that happened, the black clouds would definitely be clustering over Santa Clara.

But Dell has other things to worry about. It has stopped offering as an option for its Dimension XPS desktop the Intel 3.4 GHz Extreme Edition P4 processor, as six weeks plus lead times are not acceptable.

Let's not forget that the chip giant's Extreme Edition chip is manufactured on Intel's supposedly "mature" 130 nm process. So if Intel can't supply the necessary volume for its most important customer, something appears to be out of kilter. Maybe that's the reason why two additional metal layers have been earmarked for that particular processor.

Potomac, Intel's AMD64 compatible Xeon MP, doesn't ship until sometime next year, so Dell has to be thinking how long it can tolerate not having a 32/64-bit x86 platform which covers all market segments, especially when its competitors are selling such solutions today.

Taken all together, that has to be worrying for Dell because its customers now have alternative tier one options if AMD processor based solutions take their fancy.

Another thing that should be worrying Dell are retail PC buyers that do their homework. If such buyers are looking to buy a HP or Dell desktop, and concludes that the AMD processor based solutions offer better value, Dell won't even be in the frame. If that is the strategy behind HP's Pavilion PC positioning, then it's a very good piece of strategic planning.

Dell has just had another excellent quarter. First quarter sales reached $11.5 billion, which delivered net income of $731 million. Also, as the icing on the cake, it retook the PC sales crown back from HP.

One thing Dell can't afford to ignore is the progress that AMD64 is making. Its first year of commercial availability was one of establishment and bedding down, which has gone far better than anyone could have predicted. That suggests AMD64's second year report card could reflect massive revenue success, especially in the server space.

If that should prove to be the case, Dell will have to get onboard the AMD64 train before sales go exponential. If it misses that train or gets on very late, its competitors will have an opportunity to make inroads at its expense.

So how long can Dell afford to wait? With the impact that AMD64 has had in the market place, the problems that are on Intel's plate, HP's positioning of its AMD processor based solutions, and the fact that dual-core AMD64 processors will be launched next year, perhaps not for very long. µ

L'INQ
Pavilion range

See Also
Intel Celerons roasted on open fire for poor performance
Slowest Athlon 64 humbles fastest P4 in gaming
Prescott moves towards 120+ Watts
If HP's right, Dell will have to adopteron the AMD Opteron
Sun launches "in-your-face" media campaign for Opteron server
Intel adds two layers to .13µ Extreme Editions
HP's quad Opteron makes a big splash
Where AMD leads, Intel follows