AMD vs. Intel

[Jerry202]

Can anybody explain to me how Intel is still ahead of AMD in market share? I find it insane that AMD has great performance for less power consumption and they still only take up 21% of the market vs Intel's 79%.

 

Is it just because not everybody are nerds like us that like upgrading their PCs every year and most of the market share is just "legacy" systems?

[Electronics Wizardy]

Where are you getting that market share data from? What systems are included?

 

Laptops are mostly intel it seems, and bushiness desktops are also a lot of inter boxes being shipped. Thats probably a lot of that gap in those 2 segments.

[Van is Livid]

You know how everything has a computer in it now? Intel dosent just make desktop and laptop pcs. They also make a TON of chips for everything you can think of. 

[Dedayog]

1 hour ago, Electronics Wizardy said:

Where are you getting that market share data from? What systems are included?

 

Laptops are mostly intel it seems, and bushiness desktops are also a lot of inter boxes being shipped. Thats probably a lot of that gap in those 2 segments.

https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/amd-records-its-highest-server-market-share-in-decades-but-intel-fights-back-in-client-pcs

 

https://www.anandtech.com/show/21392/amd-hits-record-high-share-in-x86-cpus-in-q1-2024

 

Among other sources, etc.

 

 

 

 

[porina]

Enthusiast sites like these represent only a small part of the market, so there is a severe selection bias if you look at what happens on a forum like this and extrapolate it to the wider market. Even then it is often even more skewed by a vocal minority.

 

Actually, since a lot of focus in a forum like this is gaming, we can take a look at the Steam Hardware Survey. It looks pretty consistent for a while, roughly 2/3 Intel to 1/3 AMD. So there is more of a move to AMD in this space than the wider market.

 

Edit: the other problem I see with forums like these is that buying "advice" is often given based on extremely narrow and selective criteria. Small differences are amplified so that one option is the best thing ever, and the other might as well not exist, when in practice it is a small % difference that no one will notice outside of a benchmark run. Non-performance related aspects are often ignored.

[lolomid]

 both companies offer a wide range of processors that cater to different needs and budgets. Intel currently holds the lead in overall performance and value, while AMD excels in power efficiency and specialized gaming CPUs.

[Jerry202]

23 hours ago, Van is Livid said:

You know how everything has a computer in it now? Intel dosent just make desktop and laptop pcs. They also make a TON of chips for everything you can think of. 

Those initial numbers were without including IoT and SoC...

https://www.theregister.com/2024/05/10/amd_gains_on_intel/

6 hours ago, lolomid said:

 both companies offer a wide range of processors that cater to different needs and budgets. Intel currently holds the lead in overall performance and value, while AMD excels in power efficiency and specialized gaming CPUs.

That's what boggles my mind, the fact that AMD makes the more power efficient ones so you'd think companies would want those. Also, wouldn't stuff like security cameras or something like that benefit from the better multi-threaded performance? Now I'm curious about what goes on inside IoT devices

 

17 hours ago, porina said:

Enthusiast sites like these represent only a small part of the market, so there is a severe selection bias if you look at what happens on a forum like this and extrapolate it to the wider market. Even then it is often even more skewed by a vocal minority.

 

Actually, since a lot of focus in a forum like this is gaming, we can take a look at the Steam Hardware Survey. It looks pretty consistent for a while, roughly 2/3 Intel to 1/3 AMD. So there is more of a move to AMD in this space than the wider market.

 

Edit: the other problem I see with forums like these is that buying "advice" is often given based on extremely narrow and selective criteria. Small differences are amplified so that one option is the best thing ever, and the other might as well not exist, when in practice it is a small % difference that no one will notice outside of a benchmark run. Non-performance related aspects are often ignored.

Main reason I went AMD was because of the price to performance, also the fact that that Intel has done that "locking certain features so you pay more". As far as I can recall, AMD hasn't done that soooo I don't want to support the company that does/did

[Caprican_DRJ]

On 10/16/2024 at 10:08 PM, Jerry202 said:

Can anybody explain to me how Intel is still ahead of AMD in market share? I find it insane that AMD has great performance for less power consumption and they still only take up 21% of the market vs Intel's 79%.

 

Is it just because not everybody are nerds like us that like upgrading their PCs every year and most of the market share is just "legacy" systems?

After a month of playing the will it or won't it boot game with AM5 and trying 3 brands of ram, 3 PSU, 2 motherboards, I gave up. Took it all back and came home with intel. It's amazing how satisfying it is to push the power button and have it turn on. 

Ram training on most versions of bios either failed or took over an hour and I wasn't waiting. It would boot perfectly one day, and then fail the next. context restore only resulted in more crashing. It would drop the usb, but also the pci slots and drive after about 10 minutes of running. I hit the power button for a soft off but it crashed before that could happen. Maybe I had a problem CPU, but it really shouldn't happen and when looking on forums I was seeing people complaining about the same issue years ago. All I want is a stable computer to work from.

[Jerry202]

On 10/18/2024 at 5:23 PM, Caprican_DRJ said:

After a month of playing the will it or won't it boot game with AM5 and trying 3 brands of ram, 3 PSU, 2 motherboards, I gave up. Took it all back and came home with intel. It's amazing how satisfying it is to push the power button and have it turn on. 

Ram training on most versions of bios either failed or took over an hour and I wasn't waiting. It would boot perfectly one day, and then fail the next. context restore only resulted in more crashing. It would drop the usb, but also the pci slots and drive after about 10 minutes of running. I hit the power button for a soft off but it crashed before that could happen. Maybe I had a problem CPU, but it really shouldn't happen and when looking on forums I was seeing people complaining about the same issue years ago. All I want is a stable computer to work from.

Sounds like a damn nightmare  maybe you just had bad luck? Last year I built my first PC ever with all AMD and it's been working just fine. Only problem I've run into is when I tried installing a 12TB hard drive, I found out a couple of the SATA ports on my mobo weren't working. Don't know if that's a CPU not having enough lanes thing or just dead from stock ports, didn't really look into it cuz I just kept changing ports after buying my second SATA cable and it worked.