For those of you who follow processor sales very closely (we do), you may have noticed the continual dry up of AMD OEM, "Whitebox" or "Tray", processors. OEM/Tray processors are chips that generally come with very short warranties (90 days to 1 year, through the vendor) and don't come with a fan or certificate of authenticity (COA). After talking to several merchants in the North America, it looks as though AMD has started to officially and unofficially impose a ban on OEM components.

Almost all OEM or Tray products you see at merchants (brick & mortar and online) have some sort of "gray" history. A manufacturer produces whitebox items with the intention that the item will go directly into a system build. A powerful merchant might leverage several thousand whitebox products for system builds, then sell half of them directly to the customer. The merchant wins two fold, generating sales by selling the OEM products cheap (or even at cost!), and then using the rest of the products into systems.

What's the matter with OEM products?

Gray Market products, in general, make distributors and product manufacturers nervous. For starters, OEM products are sold to system builders in bulk with the intention that they will be used in pre-built systems. This makes the merchant liable for quality-control. For example, if a bad chip ships, it's the fault of the system builder, not the manufacturer. The reason why distributors get nervous is because OEM products are usually sold to the system builder directly, and not through a distributor - removing their primary reason to exist. Distributors and manufacturers work in tandem to assure the vendors sell products at or above a predetermined price; this prevents price wars. When system builders sell the chips they bought from the manufacturer on the open market, they don't necessarily need to adhere to the prices set by the distributor or manufacturer.

Removing the distributor from the supply chain can be both a blessing and a curse. Almost all major vendors now have at least some AMD chips drop shipped straight from Singapore. Without a distributor between the manufacturer and the vendor, the customer benefits by getting a cheaper price on that particular item. On the other hand, when a merchant locks into this sort of supply chain, it cannot leverage better deals based on volume. A distributor can purchase tens of thousands of components at a time while a merchant might only be able to purchase a thousand. In the long run, it can be cheaper to buy through a distributor because they get better pricing than the merchant does directly.

Of course there is also the quintessential whitebox problem. We've all heard of the guy who bought a chip, placed the wrong heat sink and/or fan on it, and then went through six months of hell attempting to get their chip returned because it burned out (or one of a dozen other similar horror stories). If anything, these problems are the merchant's responsibility. However, poor performance on behalf of the merchant equals to a poor representation of the product brand as a whole. When an upcoming IT manager hears these horror stories, the poor reputation is stuck on the brand rather than the merchant.

The Final Verdict

As a result of constant price wars between merchants (and even those quasi-vendor-distributor hybrids), AMD is stipulating that all merchants must sell Boxed Retail processors in the future. Intel actually did this several years ago during the late Pentium III days, which is why you don't really see OEM Intel processors anymore. We've been told that vendors who actively promote gray market parts can lose cobrand advertising money. Some merchants have completely dropped OEM AMD chips altogether, although there seems to be an unofficial understanding that existing merchants can flush out their inventory before harsher actions are in order.

The loss of OEM/Tray AMD chips shouldn't hurt the customer too much in the end. There is generally a two or three week difference between when merchants receive OEM vs. Retail products, but we've been assured this lag is diminishing. The cost differential between OEM and Retail chips has started to narrow over the last year as well, but there are still instances where OEM chips really offer a better value. Most new chips are generally retail only, but there are some examples like the "E6" Venice chips that exist almost solely in the gray market area.

While some people may now be forced to spend $10 more on a retail CPU, or end up with an extra HSF, overall the move has to be seen as positive. It's our opinion that improving their CPU reputation by making all chips bear the official AMD COA can only help AMD in the long run.

Comments Locked

30 Comments

View All Comments

  • BigLan - Monday, October 3, 2005 - link

    Amen to that.... oem chips are all I've ever bought because they're cheap, and traditionally amd chips were cheaper than Intel. Like another comment said, AMD seem to be getting more and more expensive.

    Another thought - how many people have actually had to RMA a chip after more than an month? In my experience if it works when you first install it, it's probably not going to have a problem.
  • BigLan - Monday, October 3, 2005 - link

    From the new A64 overclocking guide

    "The price of entry for the cheapest Venice core (the 3000+) is once again very low; $120 for the OEM model, or $145 for the retail version."

    That's a 20% difference right there.
  • TrogdorJW - Monday, October 3, 2005 - link

    Apparently, the Venice 3200+ is even a bigger gap: OEM = $140, retail = $190. That's 36%!

    That said, the drop in prices of Venice OEM chips is probably due to exactly what this article states: an attempt to clear out excess OEM inventory before AMD introduces harsher measures. Two months ago, the difference was not anywhere near 20%, let alone 35%.
  • Falloutboy - Monday, October 3, 2005 - link

    I cans ee there point of view, but I normally by OEM not for the cheaper price but because alot of retailers let you choose or atleast know exactly what stepping chip your buying. I also don't like the fact that you won't be able to purchace any of the DTR Laptop chips since those were always exclusivly OEM chips
  • Beenthere - Monday, October 3, 2005 - link

    There are a LOT of questionable Marketeers out there who get back door deals on OEM chips and then peddle them to unsuspecting consumers. AMD's decision is a sound one and even if you don't care for the OEM heatsink, the three year warranty is worth the $10. If I had a dollar for every person who couldn't get some slimeball Marketeer to warranty a CPU, I'd be a millionaire. Of course if I had a dollar for every PC enthusiast who fried or damaged a CPU through negligence...I'd also be a millionaire.
  • imaheadcase - Monday, October 3, 2005 - link

    The latest heatsink/fan on retail amd CPUs are pretty much as good as most you can buy.
  • Calin - Wednesday, October 5, 2005 - link

    No they are not. But they are at least as good as any other $10 heat sink and fan.
    They aren't very high performance, and not completely silent. However, I bet you should pay 3x more for either a high performance or a silent cooling setup
  • Lifted - Monday, October 3, 2005 - link

    A purely marketing move. They just want to improve their brand name. The only difference it will make is with cheaper Semprons where the added cost of a retail chip could be upwards of 15% or so, but you still get the heatsink and fan anyway, so it's a wash.
  • Quiksel - Monday, October 3, 2005 - link

    AND the warranty
  • Samus - Monday, October 3, 2005 - link

    God Damn, from all the retail boxes I've been forced to buy, I've accumulated a massive stack of HSF's.

    All my CPU's are going into SFF's that have their own cooling system.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now