Passmark Stats Indicate AMD Gaining Market Share vs Intel Thanks to Ryzen

[notb]

Get over yourself you know that generalization isn't aimed at you. If you insist on taking offense then by all means ignore this comment.

So how should we understand @TheGuruStud's comment? Maybe he cares to comment?
You're establishing a mutual admiration society?

Once again:

Idiots keep trying to game on laptops lol.

 

[vega22]

You think this is worse than plebs blaming game devs for not optimizing games for new CPU architecture?

i think most of them gaming on laptops wouldn't know a conroe from a canoe tbh :lol:

nor would they understand that the game has very little to do with the hardware, that it is the engine and api that need to be updated to get the most from the hardware

edit

and i think the stats are representative of systems being sold/built at that time and not total market share.

 

[medi01]

Dude are you high, loads of people play games on Laptops/Notebooks. You think people only play AAA tittles ? Indie games, MMORPG, any other Multiplayer games like DOTA 2 etc are easy on these hardwares.

Dude, you clearly have reading comprehension problems, let me highlight it for you, perhaps it will help: "Hardly anyone games on notebooks because he/she thinks it is faster."

 

[Totally]

So how should we understand @TheGuruStud's comment? Maybe he cares to comment?
You're establishing a mutual admiration society?

Once again:

Are there idiots who game on laptops? Most likely.
Do I game on a laptop? yes.
Am I an idiot? no.

Comment does not apply, moving along.

 

[notb]

i think most of them gaming on laptops wouldn't know a conroe from a canoe tbh :lol:

Of course they don't. Isn't this great?
They can spend so much more time playing games instead of reading about CPUs.

nor would they understand that the game has very little to do with the hardware, that it is the engine and api that need to be updated to get the most from the hardware

Again, why bother?
This is the thing behind console popularity. You buy a box, you put in these weird shiny disks called DVDs and a game shows on the TV.
Great stuff.

and i think the stats are representative of systems being sold/built at that time and not total market share.

You're mixing this with usage share (aka popularity).
Market share IS about sales - hence the word "market".
Having x% market share means selling x% of a particular product (either by units or revenue) over some time period.

 

[Gasaraki]

Passmark doesn't mean shit, it's a benchmark software. People be benching Ryzens cause it's new.

 

[R-T-B]

Passmark doesn't mean shit, it's a benchmark software. People be benching Ryzens cause it's new.

There may be a grain of truth to this, but the rush to bench say... Bulldozer? That was obviously much much smaller. Hey, it was new once, too.

 

[Gasaraki]

There may be a grain of truth to this, but the rush to bench say... Bulldozer? That was obviously much much smaller. Hey, it was new once, too.

True but then we'll have to go back and see if "Passmark Stats Indicate AMD Gaining Market Share vs Intel Thanks to Bulldozer" headline showed up back then.

 

[R-T-B]

True but then we'll have to go back and see if "Passmark Stats Indicate AMD Gaining Market Share vs Intel Thanks to Bulldozer" headline showed up back then.

My point was the marketshare gain from Bulldozer was nill to nonexistent? Not sure what you are getting at.

 

[notb]

My point was the marketshare gain from Bulldozer was nill to nonexistent? Not sure what you are getting at.

Thing is though: Bulldozer was just another architecture at first (before it was recognized as awful). It didn't increase AMD's market share, but it didn't lower it either.

Ryzen is pretty good performance-wise, but that's half of the story. It's a tweaker's wet dream: RAM problems, new BIOS coming out all the time, occasional optimizations available etc.
It's fairly obvious that Ryzen's popularity among people that benchmark their CPUs is very high - totally unrepresentative for the whole market.
Look at the left side of the graph. There's a similar situation in 2005/2006 - that's Athlon 64 X2 - the first proper 2C CPU.
PassMark figures are already biased in relation to actual market share, as they promote products popular among gamers and nerds. Ryzen only strengthens this effect.

Moreover, I'm not entirely sure what's counted. Are these individual machines or sent results? Because if it's the latter, it could again increase AMD's share.

From the fundamental side, we have the AMD Q1 results: revenue in consumer segment was up $130M. Even if we assume this is all down to Ryzen's 1-month sales and that only 7 1700 was being sold ($329), we arrive at around 400k extra CPUs.
However, Ryzen 5 are cheaper, so lets just safely assume they were selling extra 1M CPUs / month in Q2 (compared to 2016).
Even with this assumption (fairly optimistic) it is very unlikely that AMD's market share increased by more than 3-4pp (since Intel sells over 30M CPUs / month). That's nowhere near the ~7pp we see on PassMark chart - I don't think they could even make CPUs necessary for that, let alone sell them.