Microprocessor
Intel overwhelms
Intel continued its domination in the microprocessor category polling 85 percent of the total votes, with AMD getting only 15 percent. Respondents opined that AMD’s lack of marketing and OEM partnerships resulted in the customer-pull for the brand touching its lowest point in several years.
Product availability
Intel is the most widely distributed product. But, being the dominant brand, the company suffered from parallel imports. The changes in its sub-distribution model and sporadic unavailability of some fast-moving SKUs during the year were key issues. AMD scored better as partners feel that with lower demand there were fewer availability issues.
Price-performance
The majority of partners believe that Intel has completely regained the performance crown in every category from entry-level processors to high-end servers. While AMD continued pitching Sempron processors against Intel’s Atom, Atom’s superior power management features coupled with the availability of Mini ITX form factor-based motherboards helped systems builders to deliver nettops. Intel also negated AMD’s Athlon X2 processors in the mainstream desktop market with aggressive pricing. During the first two quarters of 2009, the chip major consistently made available Pentium D processors for less than Rs 3,000, and by Q3 2009 Intel slashed the prices of its entry-level Core 2 Duo processors to less than Rs 4,000.
Although AMD had processors such as Phenom, Phenom II Dual Core, Triple Core and Quad Core, respondents said that Intel with its Core 2 Quad processors offered a much better product. Some partners were also critical that AMD was not pushing its 2-way, 4-way and 8-way Opterons through channels, preferring to align only with large OEMs for mid-market and high-end servers. Intel’s launch of Nehalem (Xeon 5000 series) helped the company to win virtually every vote in server processors.
Partner profitability
A major complaint was the availability of Intel processors through gray channels and parallel imports. This affected the market operating prices (MOP); products bought from Intel’s authorized channel were Rs 150-400 higher than in the open market. However, these issues were sidelined by respondents who said that Intel’s sales volumes make up for low margins.
Marketing and training
AMD partners expressed disappointment that the vendor did virtually nothing to grow its brands such as Phenom and Phenom II. Partners accept that Intel’s branding is way bigger than AMD’s. While partners allege that Intel’s channel marketing and training budgets have been slashed, they feel that Intel’s activities were still more visible than those of its rival. Sparx, AMD’s multi-city training initiative, was well appreciated by respondents.
Post-sales support
Intel was rated higher than AMD in warranty support in class A and B cities. Partners in class C and D cities were critical of the support provided by both vendors.
Channel policy and management
Intel’s Channel Supplier Program, which was launched in 2008, lost steam in 2009. Many sub-distributors either moved out or were allegedly removed by Intel. This upset a few respondents who questioned the wisdom of the move. Yet overall the company topped this criterion but that’s because the respondents didn’t see any major channel engagement initiative from AMD.
<< back to the List
|