Monday, July 3rd 2017
Passmark Stats Indicate AMD Gaining Market Share vs Intel Thanks to Ryzen
It seems AMD finally producing a competitive architecture to Intel may be showing in more than just words, but also in market share, if the recent Passmark benchmark reports are anything to go by. Passmark is a system benchmark used by builders and buyers to gauge a systems overall performance, so while it is not a complete market analysis, it is a good market indicator.
AMD market share has been historically decreasing for years relative to Intel since the launch of Intel's massively succesful "core" series of CPUs. To demonstrate this and the subsequent turnaround, Passmark has assembled the following neat little "Red vs Blue" graph below, showing historic and present market figures:
If we examine the above graph, we find the most recent trend of AMD market gains has not been mirrored since about 2005-2006, which certainly is a positive indicator for the market perception of AMD's product performance. It would seem for once AMD is not only competitive in words, but also where it matters: In the hearts and minds of system builders.
Source:
Passmark
AMD market share has been historically decreasing for years relative to Intel since the launch of Intel's massively succesful "core" series of CPUs. To demonstrate this and the subsequent turnaround, Passmark has assembled the following neat little "Red vs Blue" graph below, showing historic and present market figures:
34 Comments on Passmark Stats Indicate AMD Gaining Market Share vs Intel Thanks to Ryzen
Since we're comparing mainstream platforms, Steam >>> Passmark
www.mindfactory.de/Hardware/Prozessoren+(CPU)/AMD+Desktop/Sockel+AM4.html
1600 sells like hotcakes. I think only 7700K sells
as well, or even a littlemuch better(just checked some numbers), as 1600 from the Intel camp.It's not just the fact that Ryzen is new and people tend to benchmark it more. It's also about target audience. AMD CPUs are attractive to geeks, so they're more often benchmarked - regardless of the release cycle.
Notebook users rarely benchmark their machines and business users don't do this at all - these are the segments Intel dominates even more significantly (more profitable as well).
Just to give you an example: in 2014 Intel's "market share" according to PassMark was ~75%.
More precise market research (e.g. from IDC) suggests it was more like 82% for desktops and 90% for notebooks (keep in mind notebooks outsell desktops).
www.forbes.com/sites/rogerkay/2014/11/25/intel-and-amd-the-juggernaut-vs-the-squid/#abf8df22981b
As pointed out, Steam usage statistics show growing Intel share (not very representative as well, but still better than PassMark):
store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey/processormfg/
What's wrong with gaming on laptops? And how do you know laptops drive Intel's growth?
In my example, I couldn't wait for mobile Zen, so I the only alternative was Intel...
Practically always it is a conscious compromise of more mobility vs more performance.
Your arrogant and insulting post makes no sense.
so after showing evidence that claims intels laptop segment is the real driving force behind their current market share you forgot about it did you?
interesting.
as for what is wrong with gaming on them. normally the under powered cooling which is not designed to run full power for extended periods. that then causes the fps to suffer at which point the plebs tend to blame the game devs xD
At any rate, if we do another advertorial, I think we've learned big bold letters are neccesary. Be thankful we at least tell you, unlike some out there with less profesionalism. :p
They're observing what CPUs are being benchmarked, but they (and everyone else) use it as an estimator of market share.You think this is worse than plebs blaming game devs for not optimizing games for new CPU architecture? :)Majority just few years ago. Today it's most likely a small group, but not because you can't game on IGP, but because a desktop is pretty pointless for most people.
* No integrated graphics CPUs
* No high end enthusiast/pro user CPU out (yet)
* No good Ryzen mobile CPU
If they do them right, Intel will have serious competition. I only hope they don't limit the CPUs with iGPU to only 4 cores both for desktop and mobile.
You're establishing a mutual admiration society?
Once again: