Friday, May 10th 2024

AMD Hits Highest-Ever x86 CPU Market Share in Q1 2024 Across Desktop and Server

May 10th, 2024 12:46 Discuss (140 Comments)

AMD has reached a significant milestone, capturing a record-high share of the X86 CPU market in the first quarter of 2024, according to the latest report from Mercury Research. This achievement marks a significant step forward for the chipmaker in its long battle against rival Intel's dominance in the crucial computer processor space. The surge was fueled by strong demand for AMD's Ryzen and EPYC processors across consumer and enterprise markets. The Ryzen lineup's compelling price-to-performance ratio has struck a chord with gamers, content creators, and businesses seeking cost-effective computing power without sacrificing capabilities. It secured AMD's 23.9% share, an increase from the previous Q4 of 2023, which has seen a 19.8% market share.

The company has also made major inroads on the data center front with its EPYC server CPUs. AMD's ability to supply capable yet affordable processors has enabled cloud providers and enterprises to scale operations on AMD's platform. Several leading tech giants have embraced EPYC, contributing to AMD's surging server market footprint. Now, it is at 23.6%, a significant increase over the past few years, whereas AMD was just above 10% four years ago in 2020. AMD lost some share to Intel on the mobile PC front due to the Meteor Lake ramp, but it managed to gain a small percentage of the market share of client PCs. As AMD rides the momentum into the second half of 2024, all eyes will be on whether the chipmaker can sustain this trajectory and potentially claim an even larger slice of the x86 CPU pie from Intel in the coming quarters.

Below, you can see additional graphs of mobile PC and client PC market share.

Source: AnandTech

Add your own comment

140 Comments on AMD Hits Highest-Ever x86 CPU Market Share in Q1 2024 Across Desktop and Server

#76

bug

Tek-CheckNvidia, AMD, Qualcomm, MediaTek, Broadcom, Apple and others are "doomed" without their own fabs? Open your eyes dude...

They're not doomed, we are. Look what happened in the last few years when demand for chips went through the roof, everybody wanted more fab space, had to pretty much bid for it and we're still paying the higher prices as a result. As a consequence, the world has (finally) started talking about building more fabs and not necessarily halfway around the world. It will be years before we reap any rewards, but I bet anyone on your list, save maybe Apple, wishes now they had their own fab.

Panther_SeraphinAMD had their own fabs and it nearly killed them outright

Because they mismanaged it, not because having a fab kills you.

#77

usiname

P4-630amazon.nl

Best selling, my @$$
Its enough just to look at the count of the reviews to see that the top intel chips are outselled in ways, this pathetic 12100 released 2 years ago :roll:

#78

JohH

Good for them. They deserve it. Well they probably deserve even more in the server market.

#79

ARF

Tek-CheckNot all of them. Some have really dodgy names, such as 5700, which is Cezanne APU for desktop with 16MB of L3.

I don't see anything "dodgy". Ryzen 7 5700 fits exactly between Ryzen 5 5600X and Ryzen 7 5700X.
The size of the cache has little influence over the overall performance, here and there some apps may witness boosts, more rarely rather than often.

FYI:
www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu.php?id=4814&cpu=AMD+Ryzen+7+5700X
www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu.php?id=4968&cpu=AMD+Ryzen+7+5700
www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu.php?cpu=AMD+Ryzen+5+5600X&id=3859

#80

ARF

Panther_SeraphinIts actually more the bean counters. You could pickup Hp/Dell/Lenovos with Intels for cheaper than the "equivalent" AMD for a long time.

IT: "But AMDs have better battery life"
Beancounter: "Most people use them plugged in the office and the Intel ones are $/£30-50 cheaper a unit"
IT: "But AMDs are a better choice"
Beancounter: "It is 5-6 figures extra to replace our fleet with AMD vs Intel, you somehow justify that 6 figure difference in productivty etc then we will consider it, otherwise Intel it is"

I wonder why AMD doesn't decrease its prices for the large OEMs, with the condition to buy only AMD. :D

#81

Tek-Check

ARFI don't see anything "dodgy". Ryzen 7 5700 fits exactly between Ryzen 5 5600X and Ryzen 7 5700X.
The size of the cache has little influence over the overall performance, here and there some apps may witness boosts, more rarely rather than often.

Hardware unboxed for you. It's even slower than R5 5600 non-X. This APU should have NEVER been called "5700". Nonsense. It's 5700F

#82

ARF

Tek-CheckHardware unboxed for you.

I prefer to take AMD's word over some random internet guy who is a representative of no-one knows who...

#83

TheinsanegamerN

Darmok N JaladI think at least part of this is probably the life of servers. I imagine they build them with an expected in-service lifetime, and there would have to be a really big cost-benefit to retool before then. I bet it's at least 5 years before anything other than storage gets even considered for replacement.

There's a bigger issue. Most places run the majority of servers virtually, with only the hypervisors as actual hardware. Most rotate hypervisors in and out on that 5 year plan.

Except, every VM manager out there will warn you of the problems switching a virtual host live from intel to AMD or vice versa. So unless you buck the upgrade schedule and do them ALL at once, you stick with intel. The further AMD pulls ahead and the better their software gets, the more switch to AMD EPYC, but it is a very slow process.

GodisanAtheistJust goes to show what a thing "mindshare" is and how badly perception can hurt a business.

AMD has been firing on all cylinders since 2016 and Zen 1, 8 years, and they've at best made a dent in Intel's hegemony.

Imagine how impeccable AMD's execution would have to be in their secondary GPU unit to make similar inroads against Nvidia...

zen 1 was neat as an enthusiast, but on a per core basis, it took until zen 2 before AMD was comparable and zen 3 for them to supersede intel in performance. In mobile, AMD's first gen of APUs was a total flop, between higher power use, poor CPU performance, and of course trying to send GPU driver support to OEMs instead of doing it themselves, tarnishing AMD's name with garbage drivers and pissing OEMs off.

Then there's other things, like intel has multiple motherboards they design around their CPUs that OEMs can use in their own hardware or buy and modify for their needs. AMD, until recently, did not do this, and still doesnt compare to intels options.

#84

Panther_Seraphin

ARFI prefer to take AMD's word over some random internet guy who is a representative of no-one knows who...

Then you need to realise that the big manufacturers best interests is not being 100% truthful to users. Its to make Shareholders money. Also when you do the research you notice the difference is mainly the 50% L3 cache cut...........which is also where the X3Ds GAIN their performance over the normal parts as they have 200% more.

The 5700 (Non-X) is akin to Nvidia doing the DDR4/DDR3 cards back in the day

Also Passmark is a 1 dimensional showing of CPU performance. All of these are 8 core 16thread parts with similar clock speeds. Just the L3 cache is different

Passmarks shows a ~15% difference between the three

Where as in games

Its over 30% and the big thing is that in the 1% lows its get up near 50%. This isnt the only example of this difference.

#85

Darmok N Jalad

Tek-CheckCorporations need to employ more IT people who are more knowledgeable about AMD's battery efficiency and wider laptop choices.

Panther_Seraphinwww.nextplatform.com/2021/05/11/amd-finally-breaks-the-10-percent-server-share-barrier/

Around 20 years of data up to 2021

I am glad to see that AMD is picking up market share. Intel needs to really take advantage of their Foveros technology ASAP to try and get a technological lead over AMD again.

Its actually more the bean counters. You could pickup Hp/Dell/Lenovos with Intels for cheaper than the "equivalent" AMD for a long time.

IT: "But AMDs have better battery life"
Beancounter: "Most people use them plugged in the office and the Intel ones are $/£30-50 cheaper a unit"
IT: "But AMDs are a better choice"
Beancounter: "It is 5-6 figures extra to replace our fleet with AMD vs Intel, you somehow justify that 6 figure difference in productivty etc then we will consider it, otherwise Intel it is"

There's more to it, I'm afraid. I work at a large enough company, and I deal with procurement with large non-IT contracts occasionally. Cost certainly matters, but they are usually looking at multi-year deals. I suspect with IT, it's about support and supply as much as it is cost. There's probably also some discounts offered by sticking to one brand. The result is my slow and hot i7 Z-book with its 2 measly overworked P-cores.

TheinsanegamerNThere's a bigger issue. Most places run the majority of servers virtually, with only the hypervisors as actual hardware. Most rotate hypervisors in and out on that 5 year plan.

Except, every VM manager out there will warn you of the problems switching a virtual host live from intel to AMD or vice versa. So unless you buck the upgrade schedule and do them ALL at once, you stick with intel. The further AMD pulls ahead and the better their software gets, the more switch to AMD EPYC, but it is a very slow process.

Yeah, this was what I couldn't articulate, but it makes sense. Even though they are both x86, there are differences between AMD and Intel when it comes to feature implementation. It's just not a simple switch. I suspect most of AMD's wins are either in-place AMD to AMD upgrades, or new buildouts. Stuff that's already Intel might be a taller order for switching over, especially places like data centers with racks and racks of nodes, which are going to be big orders, if/when they order.

#86

FoulOnWhite

Tek-CheckNvidia, AMD, Qualcomm, MediaTek, Broadcom, Apple and others are "doomed" without their own fabs? Open your eyes dude...

Did you even read what i said? does not look like it. "you are doomed with no supply" I never said anything about not having your own fabs dooms you, i said if you are getting your wafers from someone else and they have a problem causing the supply to stop you are doomed, read again, maybe english is not your primary language. Maybe open your own eyes dude.

#87

TheinsanegamerN

Darmok N JaladThere's more to it, I'm afraid. I work at a large enough company, and I deal with procurement with large non-IT contracts occasionally. Cost certainly matters, but they are usually looking at multi-year deals. I suspect with IT, it's about support and supply as much as it is cost. There's probably also some discounts offered by sticking to one brand. The result is my slow and hot i7 Z-book with its 2 measly overworked P-cores.

In our case, we have a Dell rep, because we use dell servers, so of course we also use Dell laptops and desktops. Dell famously does not like AMD nor really uses them. Frankly HP's options overall are very meh. Lenovo is about the only major OEM with good business contracts that widely supports AMD business machines.

Darmok N JaladYeah, this was what I couldn't articulate, but it makes sense. Even though they are both x86, there are differences between AMD and Intel when it comes to feature implementation. It's just not a simple switch. I suspect most of AMD's wins are either in-place AMD to AMD upgrades, or new buildouts. Stuff that's already Intel might be a taller order for switching over, especially places like data centers with racks and racks of nodes, which are going to be big orders, if/when they order.

New build-outs yes, existing no, since AMD had effectively 0 server market-share prior to zen. Bulldozer just didnt work and AMD pulled out of the market for several years.

As EPYC matures as a platform, and its performance improves, there's enough to convince groups to bite the bullet. We almost did at work, but in the end stability was priority. We did buy a pair of EPYC servers to run our SQL servers on, since they are so I/O heavy we dont put them on the hypervisor. So far they have blown away expectations thanks to the massive cache of the 9384x. That might be enough to convince management on the next go around.

#88

Panther_Seraphin

TheinsanegamerNAs EPYC matures as a platform, and its performance improves, there's enough to convince groups to bite the bullet. We almost did at work, but in the end stability was priority. We did buy a pair of EPYC servers to run our SQL servers on, since they are so I/O heavy we dont put them on the hypervisor. So far they have blown away expectations thanks to the massive cache of the 9384x. That might be enough to convince management on the next go around.

This is what I think will push the growth in AMDs share over the next 12-36 months, is when people hear about these sorts of things in Sysadmin/Infra circles where people who "tested" or "experimented" with a few AMD systems and were pleasently suprised will get higher ups asking the questions from their VARS "what about an AMD setup?" or asking for quotes both Intel and AMD setups.

TheinsanegamerNIn our case, we have a Dell rep, because we use dell servers, so of course we also use Dell laptops and desktops. Dell famously does not like AMD nor really uses them. Frankly HP's options overall are very meh. Lenovo is about the only major OEM with good business contracts that widely supports AMD business machines.

I suspect a small bit of it as well was a lot of the early 3rd and 4th Gen EPYC were just bought up straight off the line for things like AWS/GCP/Azure etc so they never really hit the "consumer/SI" markets until well into their product cycles.

So quotes for intel were like "Available for Immediately Delivery" and the AMD quotes were weeks/months on backorder

#89

Darmok N Jalad

TheinsanegamerNIn our case, we have a Dell rep, because we use dell servers, so of course we also use Dell laptops and desktops. Dell famously does not like AMD nor really uses them. Frankly HP's options overall are very meh. Lenovo is about the only major OEM with good business contracts that widely supports AMD business machines.

New build-outs yes, existing no, since AMD had effectively 0 server market-share prior to zen. Bulldozer just didnt work and AMD pulled out of the market for several years.

As EPYC matures as a platform, and its performance improves, there's enough to convince groups to bite the bullet. We almost did at work, but in the end stability was priority. We did buy a pair of EPYC servers to run our SQL servers on, since they are so I/O heavy we dont put them on the hypervisor. So far they have blown away expectations thanks to the massive cache of the 9384x. That might be enough to convince management on the next go around.

Panther_SeraphinThis is what I think will push the growth in AMDs share over the next 12-36 months, is when people hear about these sorts of things in Sysadmin/Infra circles where people who "tested" or "experimented" with a few AMD systems and were pleasently suprised will get higher ups asking the questions from their VARS "what about an AMD setup?" or asking for quotes both Intel and AMD setups.

I suspect a small bit of it as well was a lot of the early 3rd and 4th Gen EPYC were just bought up straight off the line for things like AWS/GCP/Azure etc so they never really hit the "consumer/SI" markets until well into their product cycles.

So quotes for intel were like "Available for Immediately Delivery" and the AMD quotes were weeks/months on backorder

Yeah, and mission critical + risk--even if it's a really low risk, can be a hard sell in the corporate world. Many companies can be pretty happy with status quo, and it takes a brave and motivated set of employees to really push things and be willing to "take the risk" and deal with any issues that come from that. The fat and happy folks are more often willing to just kick the can down the road. In my job, I'm fortunate to have a boss that likes to push things, and if we try something new and it fails, he's willing to accept that and just pivot. We aren't in IT, but the mindset is what matters, whatever the org.

#90

Minus Infinity

ARFI prefer to take AMD's word over some random internet guy who is a representative of no-one knows who...

Like their 7900XT/XTX pre-release slides showing "simulated" performance metrics which were all BS. I trust no company.

#91

Jism

JohHGood for them. They deserve it. Well they probably deserve even more in the server market.

Server stuff from AMD is just amazing.

Ive recently replaced outdated XEON's with EPYC's and its just 4x more performance at half power for the same 2U thing.

#92

mrnagant

Honestly, I am a bit surprised a vendor hasn't come around to only or largely only offer AMD products. Back in 2021 I was ordering a bunch of servers from Dell. Dell's AMD PowerEdge offerings were limited. But for those systems, and comparing to Intel, I was like "why the hell would anyone buy Intel. They'd be dumb". The AMD systems were thousands of dollars cheaper. Like I could buy 6 AMD PowerEdge servers that were better in all specs (PSU, Memory. SSDs, processors and core counts) for what I could buy 2 or 3 Intel based servers. Some of the lower end systems I got with AMD, they would be $3,000, spec'd better than a $5,000 Intel based system and that Intel system would still have software raid while the AMD builds did not.

#93

mkppo

mrnagantHonestly, I am a bit surprised a vendor hasn't come around to only or largely only offer AMD products. Back in 2021 I was ordering a bunch of servers from Dell. Dell's AMD PowerEdge offerings were limited. But for those systems, and comparing to Intel, I was like "why the hell would anyone buy Intel. They'd be dumb". The AMD systems were thousands of dollars cheaper. Like I could buy 6 AMD PowerEdge servers that were better in all specs (PSU, Memory. SSDs, processors and core counts) for what I could buy 2 or 3 Intel based servers. Some of the lower end systems I got with AMD, they would be $3,000, spec'd better than a $5,000 Intel based system and that Intel system would still have software raid while the AMD builds did not.

Dell, for whatever reason, were always the type who just doesn't change. It took them a long time to even have AMD options.

#94

Neo_Morpheus

Darmok N JaladI’m still waiting for the day that I get issued an AMD machine at work. I think Intel still really has the corporate world locked up.

For that to happen, AMD needs to reach out to the DOJ to recheck intel and dell guilty verdicts.

Plus to bribe OEMs, because it looks like performance alone its simply not enough.

Dont get me started on the bribed youtube influencers and their free 4090’s…

#95

bencrutz

v12dockI've bought 400 HP Probook/Elite Books over the past 3 years all Intel hardware. The amount of issues I've had with the Intel wireless chipset is mind blogging. This is them connecting to Cisco APs in which Cisco certified the chipset. I would certainly be opening to exploring AMD if they came with a Qualcomm chipset and I'm looking into the Qualcomm Elite chips coming out soon. I budget to replace 20% of my fleet at a 5 year depreciation.

yeah, it is a problem, switching to aruba APs mostly solved the issues.

#96

stimpy88

Looking at these graphs, it really bothers me that AMD got arrogant and raised its prices on Zen 4. If they want the gold, they need to make sure Zen 5 outperforms anything Intel can overclock, and then price it cheaper. That would explode their market share. AM5 + Zen 4 + DDR5 was so much higher priced than AM4/Zen 3, it slowed their market gains momentum, and only sold reasonably well due to its performance.

AMD needs a strategy rethink. Time to make modest profits to gain market share, then start turning the screws after you have the majority.

#97

BoggledBeagle

stimpy88Looking at these graphs, it really bothers me that AMD got arrogant and raised its prices on Zen 4. ... AMD needs a strategy rethink. Time to make modest profits to gain market share, then start turning the screws after you have the majority.

Yes. If AMD had smart shareholders, the best strategy is to limit profits to gain as large market share as possible.

Is it in today corporate world even possible to execute any real business strategy?

#98

Daven

tfdsafI don't believe the gap is still that big in the desktop space. In the server and IT space its understandable, its a very slow upgrade process and they generally tend to stick with what they know, but in the desktop space I would image it would be more like 50%-50% in terms of market share these past few years. The Ryzen 5000 series were extremely successful and are still to this day selling like hot cakes!

I think this data might not be complete and fully accurate, there is no way AMD is still lagging 40% behind Intel in the desktop space, all of the big online retailers have Ryzen processors in the top 10 bestsellers

I think you mean, no way AMD is lagging that far behind in the DIY space. IT buys desktops too (think smaller than shoebox size desktops given to 1000s of hospital employees for example) in far greater volumes than individual rig builders.

AMD and Intel are about 50/50 among us enthusiasts but its a very very small piece of the market pie.

#99

ARF

DavenAMD and Intel are about 50/50 among us enthusiasts but its a very very small piece of the market pie.

Nope. 80% AMD, 20% intel.

Amd/comments/16y3y09

#100

NC37

v12dockI've bought 400 HP Probook/Elite Books over the past 3 years all Intel hardware. The amount of issues I've had with the Intel wireless chipset is mind blogging. This is them connecting to Cisco APs in which Cisco certified the chipset. I would certainly be opening to exploring AMD if they came with a Qualcomm chipset and I'm looking into the Qualcomm Elite chips coming out soon. I budget to replace 20% of my fleet at a 5 year depreciation.

Those are HPs too. HP is the only brand I recommend people against. Have not worked on one in the last 20 yrs that had decent internals. All of them tend to suffer from similar issues too. Not to mention their printers are just as bad. Course, I don't find a lot of printers reliable these days outside of ones with the printheads on the cartridges (which is the older tech cheap ones). The rest, always clogs or have issues that require more work than they are worth.

Add your own comment

AMD Hits Highest-Ever x86 CPU Market Share in Q1 2024 Across Desktop and Server

140 Comments on AMD Hits Highest-Ever x86 CPU Market Share in Q1 2024 Across Desktop and Server

Latest GPU Drivers

New Forum Posts

Popular Reviews

Controversial News Posts

AMD Hits Highest-Ever x86 CPU Market Share in Q1 2024 Across Desktop and Server

Related News

140 Comments on AMD Hits Highest-Ever x86 CPU Market Share in Q1 2024 Across Desktop and Server

Latest GPU Drivers

New Forum Posts

Popular Reviews

Controversial News Posts