Wednesday, February 23rd 2022
Intel's Global CPU Market Share is on the Rise, AMD Starts the Downfall
Since the launch of AMD's Ryzen processors, the CPU market share has been reshaped in AMD's favor. Intel's offerings were matched by team red, and AMD quickly broke into the consumer market. However, according to the latest round of reports, it seems like that is no longer the case. As per the Japanese DIY market analysis from BCNR, sales of Intel processors started rising in mid-2021, and the company is managing to grab some market share from AMD. After nearly two years of dominance in the Japanese market, AMD is now behind Intel in sales, and team blue is getting back to its older setting.
Another source that is generally a pretty good indicator of the market share of Intel and AMD processor is PassMark. As users submit their benchmark runs, the PassMark software developer has updated the CPU market share statistics chart, mainly showing the desktop segment. It also concludes the same thing as BCRN: Intel is again gaining share in the CPU market. As it always goes hand-in-hand, AMD is losing the CPU marker share naturally. This is due to many reasons, and it seems like Intel's marketing and supply tactics are paying off. Intel now sits at 60% share, while AMD is set at 40%.
Source:
via VideoCardz
Another source that is generally a pretty good indicator of the market share of Intel and AMD processor is PassMark. As users submit their benchmark runs, the PassMark software developer has updated the CPU market share statistics chart, mainly showing the desktop segment. It also concludes the same thing as BCRN: Intel is again gaining share in the CPU market. As it always goes hand-in-hand, AMD is losing the CPU marker share naturally. This is due to many reasons, and it seems like Intel's marketing and supply tactics are paying off. Intel now sits at 60% share, while AMD is set at 40%.
112 Comments on Intel's Global CPU Market Share is on the Rise, AMD Starts the Downfall
Hopefully they've managed to work out a better top to bottom range of processors for AM5.
5800X costs 420usd and 12600KF costs 320usd, but cheapest Z690 costs 210usd, 12600KF is about 5% faster both stock and 10% tuned, but costs a bit more total with MB with 530usd vs 5800X 480-505usd.
I would consider 5600X and 5800X about equal to 12400F and 12600KF, BUT in budget i3 12100 is superior and AMD has nothing here, also 12700K\12900K is 10-15% faster than the best AMD has to offer, and the price is quite similar since you need a better and more costly MB to accomodate 5900X and 5950X..
And now that Zen is on point, its too expensive. Not smart, they haven't consolidated their lead yet and want to cash in too early. All the while its pretty silly for Ryzen MSDT chips to cost a lot, they're the weaker derivatives of the exact same stack top to bottom.
Once again I'm left with that nagging feeling AMD never truly wants to win the war, every time they win a few battles, they drop the ball somehow. I do hope I'm wrong.
Aggressive pricing does not mean market share gains.
amd didnt care since a long time for customers btween 50€-150€.
New agesas roll out and break/improve it but it's unacceptable that it's still an issue. 5950 is great otherwise but there was a lot about how bad the problem was which probably didn't help them.
Zen4 could be great unless they manage to not fix that bug...
Referring to our other conversation: This situation might seem like a positive, but it will still not result in Pcore "stagnation". Still, it does show Intel not asleep at the wheel.
From my armchair analyst perspective, it's pretty clear that AMD is severely supply constrained and are focusing all their wafers on profitable markets and contractual obligations: consoles, datacenters/supercomputers/HPC, laptop APUs (with desktop APUs mainly for OEMs but also for retail), and GPUs (high end or high priced) and high end CPUs. What's left out is low-end GPUs (well, we got the 6500 XT that ought to have been a 6400, and there are 2-3 performance tiers missing between it and the 6600) and the entirety of the low-end to mid-range CPU stack - high volume parts, but low ASP and low margin products. When corporations are guided by a philosophy of maximizing profits above all else, this is what you get. Entirely agree on this take. They seem far too eager to inflate profits, and seem to have completely misjudged Intel's ability to bring a competitive architecture to market. I'm still rather stunned why we haven't seen major price cuts for Zen3 after ADL launched. I guess they're still selling, and Zen4/AM5 isn't too far off, but ... why not just cut prices and sell through your stock quicker? I guess they don't want to cause another shortage this way, but that seems unlikely to happen unless they cut prices like 50%.
If I were building a budget PC today (which I thankfully am not), I would probably have to swallow my ideals and buy Intel, as AMD just doesn't have anything for me in those ranges. And that's an immense shame.
And remember: G APUs compete with laptops for supplies, which inherently limits them compared to CPUs that only compete with much lower quantity datacentres. Hm. They launched on November 5th 2020. That's ... slightly less than 16 months ago. Two years is 24 months. You're being very generous in your rounding up here. They're a bit more than a year old; slightly less than a year and a half. Still not brand-new by any means, but certainly not that old. It does go some way towards explaining things, though on the other hand it also emphasizes how atrocious it is that they still haven't launched anything lower end than the 5600G for retail. Why not at launch? I guess this would depend on 6nm yields and wafer outputs, and of course their increased foothold in laptops puts more pressure on that, but launching mobile APUs at CES and desktop APUs at Computex or a bit later is pretty much par for the course for Ryzen. I would be disappointed if we didn't see AM5 APUs around August or so (assuming AM5 has launched by then).
But i notice this even in less informed consumers. At this point the tables have reversed, even if Intel has a better, cheaper CPU, people don't even consider it, all they want is Ryzen, period. I blame a lot of the media, influencers for this.
Another thing that's hillarious is common people and even some pc builders, when they hear Ryzen 5, great cpu's. In the Intel side, if it isn't I7 it isn't that good. A relic of the past
AMD held a high price tag too long on 5k series
They usually drop 4-6 months after release when market is saturated and plenty are around especially the top dog chips but this took to long to happen.
And thats why I now own i3 12100F despite originally wanting to go Team Red...