【tomshardware】AMD Rising: CPU And GPU Market Share Growing Rapidly

[PotatoWithEarsOnSide]

Install base is an interesting metric. I brought it up a while ago, and got met with profit-driven short-term metrics such as monthly/quarterly sales.
Does anyone know what the replacement rate of CPUs is?
I ask simply because it can give an indication of how long it would take for AMD to get to the 30% installed base that's referenced in that article.
If we assume the market overall is stagnant (last year was the first rise in ages), and know (roughly) how many CPUs are bought each month, and then extrapolate existing monthly/quarterly market share over a longer period of time, we can work out just when AMD hits that 30% install base share.
In other words, how long before Intel has a serious problem on it's hands.
If Intel can get 10nm working competitively by then, then Intel shouldn't really experience any serious problems.

 

[Spartak]

Yes, it is growing rapidly, because we are not talking about quarterly sales, but installed base of PC's. If you have 700 000 000 PC's around the world, and AMD has grown from having under 10% to 12% that would mean that Ryzen CPU's has sold 14 mln Units in all of the surveyed markets, over 18 months(slightly more), and went from slightly under 70 mln to 84 mln PC's with AMD CPUs in that period of time. With this, calculation, AMD has just gained 20% of their total installed base with Ryzen. That is huge.

No it is sales. Read the article. 96million desktop CPU's sold last year, 12% of that is...11.5 million, the amount of CPU's sold by AMD based on that market share.

'Growing rapidly' makes my irony meter hit red levels.

 

[prtskg]

Agree. It probably counts as with intel all APUs including bristol ridge. The latter might sell quiet a lot in poorer countries.

It's add AIB market share. Doesn't that mean discrete graphics?

 

[PotatoWithEarsOnSide]

The numbers do add up to it being sales.
In the article he refers to a 250% increase in AMD production being needed, which equates to about 39m units, and in the context in which it was used that'd be ~125m combined annual sales of CPUs...of which, 39m is 30%.
The alternative scenario of Intel simply selling less, with no change in AMD sales, also checks out, though I don't recall the number used. In any event, achieving 30% by this second method would be a somewhat pyrrhic victory.

***

Anyway, since 96m annual sales are quoted, and a global install base of 700m too, that implies a replacement rate of ~88 months.
If we assume that AMD starts with an installed base of 10%, and that they have a 50% share of monthly sales (a figure often quoted in this site), then to even get to 30% installed base they'd need to consistently hit 50% monthly sales share for ~44 consecutive months. That's over three and a half years, and represents selling 300% more CPUs per year than they currently do, with Intel also selling ~45% fewer CPUs per year than they currently do. Both of which are outside the best ever year on year changes for either company, as quoted in that article.

Summary: Intel isn't in any significant danger from AMD unless AMD hits Harry Potteresque sales figures CONSISTENTLY for a long time.

 

[prtskg]

Seeing the %age it seems to me that with good product (like Zen) AMD right now is nibbling at the shares of Intel @ 2% per year.

 

[Abwx]

No it is sales. Read the article. 96million desktop CPU's sold last year, 12% of that is...11.5 million, the amount of CPU's sold by AMD based on that market share.

'Growing rapidly' makes my irony meter hit red levels.

11.5M CPUs amount to 1.7bn at most, and not sure that AMD has an 150$ ASP, so it s obvious that these are numbers of production sold only to big OEMs, retail sales are not incuded in IDC numbers since they are talking of delivered PCs.

 

[PingSpike]

Neither nVIDIA by that much... In China and India near everyone uses Intel...

For gaming cafes I've heard they're all Windows 7, Intel and Nvidia (possibly older cards?)