Gaining on Intel? AMD Increases CPU Market Share In Desktops, Laptops, and Servers (techspot.com) 21
A a report from TechSpot says AMD has recently increased its market share in the CPU sector for desktops, laptops, and servers:
According to Mercury Research (via Tom's Hardware), AMD gained 5.8% unit share in desktops, 3.8% in laptops, and 5.8% in servers. In terms of revenue share, Team Red gained 4.1% in desktops, 5.1% in laptops, and 1.7% in servers. The report does not mention competitors by name, but the global PC industry only has one other major CPU supplier, Intel, which has a major stake in all the market segments.
While Intel and AMD make x86 processors for PCs, Qualcomm offers Arm-based SoCs for Windows notebooks, but its market share is minuscule by comparison. So, while the report doesn't say anything about the market share of Intel or Qualcomm, it is fair to assume that most of AMD's gains came at Intel's expense.
Thanks to Slashdot reader jjslash for sharing the news.
While Intel and AMD make x86 processors for PCs, Qualcomm offers Arm-based SoCs for Windows notebooks, but its market share is minuscule by comparison. So, while the report doesn't say anything about the market share of Intel or Qualcomm, it is fair to assume that most of AMD's gains came at Intel's expense.
Thanks to Slashdot reader jjslash for sharing the news.
promising future for ARM (Score:2)
The 'thermal headroom' appears to indicate that ARM CPUs have a lot of room for increasing performance, 'simply' by using more power. The question may be if CPU compute performance will remain the single most important parameter to measure 'bang for the buck', or if memory bandwidth is going to be just as important.
The computing landscape is changing rapidly with the arrival of large language models, but 24+ GB GPUs are way too expensive. It is possible to utilize system memory for running LLMs even today,
Re: promising future for ARM (Score:1)
This is an abysmal sales story for AMD (Score:5, Interesting)
AMD has grabbed basically all the good headlines in the last many years. Better products with better benchmarks, security, and features. Market share keeps increasing until ... AMD has around 20-25% of the market for all its segments. If AMD can't dominate the market with products that are apparently technically dominant, then why should we believe that they have any chance of beating Intel in the marketplace?
In the last five years, AMD server share has gone from up 12! From 2% to 24%. Desktop share has been flat in the last four years, at 20%. Mobile also at 20%.
With only two competitors, those are not good numbers. Intel has shown long-term gross incompetence with both architecture and manufacturing, and yet they have 4-5x the sales of their competitor. Can you imagine what the marketplace would look like if Intel weren't incompetent?
Re: (Score:2, Troll)
Can you imagine what the marketplace would look like if Intel weren't incompetent?
Intel was allowed to get a market-dominating position through assorted illegal behavior and then nothing substantial was done to fix that, they were just fined some money they could easily afford. Can you imagine what the marketplace would look like if Intel weren't allowed to get away with illegal acts?
Re:This is an abysmal sales story for AMD (Score:4, Interesting)
They had to pay several billion $ many years later, which was like 1% of the money they made while AMD had Athlon/Athlon 64 and the equivalent Opterons when Intel had utter crap (Pentium 4).
Dell was an instrumental part of the illegal activity - they were paid by Intel. And apart from not promoting AMD themselves, from personal experience it was more than that. I remember I was evaluating servers for the new computer lab in my university, back in 2004-2005. The Opteron 64 powered HP Proliant servers were offered to us at somewhere like $2k per dual system (academic price) and they were about 60% faster in 32bit linux (on our own software) and were like 2.5x faster when we compiled our computational biology etc stuff on a 64 bit linux. It was a clear win. Suddenly, Dell with their Xeons (I think Prescott?) comes back and gives a ridiculous price of $800/dual CPU server! Surely under cost (if you discount Intel's "rebates" of course). The heads of our departed were ecstatic, they said we can now afford twice the servers! I warned them that we'll need more than twice the power and the cooling and end up with mostly similar actual performance! They, of course, did not listen and I graduated. It took them 3 years to manage to get the power and A/C requirements to install the full cluster. So they had a "new" cluster of P4-Xeons in 2008...
Re:This is an abysmal sales story for AMD (Score:5, Insightful)
Intel really had to fall flat on their faces for AMD to get to 50% of the market and even that relies on them being able to buy enough wafers from TSMC to have enough products to sell. In absence of that, their best bet is to dedicate more of that production to the high margin markets. It seems like they're putting the most effort in to server where they have the biggest advantage, which means more revenue to fund further development and to try to keep an edge for when Intel does get its shot together.
Re:This is an abysmal sales story for AMD (Score:5, Insightful)
This is a story of inertia. One of the things I learned pretty quickly ( in IT ) is that IT folks are just as susceptible to branding as anyone else. I ran into people that would only use Cisco, or Oracle, or HP or MSSQL...and they remained dedicated to the brands long after their initial reasons for loving said brands evaporated.
This is really no different; Intel was THE processor brand for a lot of folks, and no matter how much abuse they receive, they're sticking by their brand until the bitter end.
A cautionary tale for the rest of us perhaps.
Re: This is an abysmal sales story for AMD (Score:4, Insightful)
Also consider that some manufacturers have deals with Intel that gives them a discount as long as they stick to having a certain product range equipped with Intel only where the bulk volume is.
Keep the bulk volumes with Intel cheap, have AMD models that are powerful but not appealing to corporate bean-counters and you'll see why the market shares are skewed. That's why AMD laptops often have specs where some useful minor feature is missing for some 'unexplained' reason.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
AMD should have become a PC manufacturer (using their own CPUs of course).
AMD is playing the game by Intel's rules, and they can't win that way. If the likes of Dell will not ship AMD in any meaningful way, then there is next to no chance that AMD will overtake Intel.
If AMD had been selling AMD laptops, workstations and servers directly, they could eke out better margins and beat Intel, but more importantly, Dell, HP, Lenovo etc that way. Right now, the large volume integrators have no incentive to annoy In
Re:This is an abysmal sales story for AMD (Score:4, Interesting)
" Can you imagine what the marketplace would look like if Intel weren't incompetent?"
Don't expect me to argue. I went with AMD just because Intel's built in graphics were so bad. I don't do video games so don't need a separate video card.
Sadly in 2013 Intel had the Iris Pro 5200 (Passmark 1202) but they dropped that and stuck with the HD 630 (Passmark 1109) until when, 2019? They went nowhere in 6 years, really?
So I went with an AMD 3200G (Passmark 1934) when I built the Linux box in 2019.
Re: (Score:1)
Interestingly enough, Intel has recently contributed to Mesa and Linux, massive performance improvement patches for a lot of those older mediocre integrated video products, to the point where if you were to put a recent Linux distro on one of those old machines you may no longer find its graphical performance to be so disappointing. I do not by any means however bring this up in Intel's defense, don't get me wrong, I'm more bringing it up as a scathing rebuke of their software development practices as well.
Market Control, Contract Guilt & The Intel Log (Score:2)
Combined with the general lack of knowledge by the masses. The government should mandate Intel processors to be more efficient, cost less and have their company name and logo changed. Also, I need an Intel Management Engine to monitor my Intel Management Engines.
Re: (Score:2)
-mic drop.
Re: (Score:2)
I only answer questions in the form of questions. Is anything made in USA anymore?
30 years (Score:1)
Re: 30 years (Score:2)
US Government needs at least 2 COTS suppliers for CPUs. Unless one of the top 2 gets displaced, you'll keep reading those headlines.
Jarrod's Tech (Score:2)
Jarrod's Tech, a YouTube channel, compiled a video [youtube.com] using data from laptop sales which were purchased using his affiliate links. In that set of data, 1/3 of those gaming laptops sold in 2023 had an AMD CPU.
So this means that this channel's audience (or at least those who used his affiliate links) preferred AMD at a higher rate than the general public. This could also possibly extend to other buyers of gaming laptops as well.
Fuck intel (Score:2)
I just upgraded my 2018 Ryzen 7 2700x to an absolute beast 5800x3D by just replacing the CPU, no other components. The performance difference is almost double.
Re: (Score:2)