• Guest, The rules for the P & N subforum have been updated to prohibit "ad hominem" or personal attacks against other posters. See the full details in the post "Politics and News Rules & Guidelines."

Article "AMD vs. Intel CPU Market Share Q4 2019: EPYC and Ryzen Growth Decelerate, Mobile Ryzen Up" - Tom's

UsandThem

Elite Member
Super Moderator
May 4, 2000
13,515
4,156
146
https://www.tomshardware.com/news/amd-vs-intel-cpu-market-share-q4-2019-epyc-and-ryzen-growth-decelerate-mobile-ryzen-up
AMD dominated Intel in Amazon's most popular CPU rankings during Black Friday and Cyber Monday, often occupying the top ten spots. However, this reminds us that the retail market is much smaller than the OEM/SI segment where Intel has historically ruled the roost. Volume sales to this segment are comparatively much larger than retail, and according to our conversations with several motherboard vendors at CES 2020, Intel still maintains its leadership in the OEM/SI segment.
Their slowing market share growth surprised me honestly. With Intel's various security vulnerabilities, manufacturing shortages, 10nm set-backs, and CEO ouster were almost perfect storm for AMD to really gain a good chunk of the market.

AMD has really been on point with their products the last 4 years, but this data shows they have a huge uphill battle against Intel in the OEM markets.
 

itsmydamnation

Platinum Member
Feb 6, 2011
2,119
1,592
136
just remember Mercury and AMD count server share differently. We need a breakdown of the different server segments to see what really happened.
 

teejee

Senior member
Jul 4, 2013
337
176
116
https://www.tomshardware.com/news/amd-vs-intel-cpu-market-share-q4-2019-epyc-and-ryzen-growth-decelerate-mobile-ryzen-up

Their slowing market share growth surprised me honestly. With Intel's various security vulnerabilities, manufacturing shortages, 10nm set-backs, and CEO ouster were almost perfect storm for AMD to really gain a good chunk of the market.

AMD has really been on point with their products the last 4 years, but this data shows they have a huge uphill battle against Intel in the OEM markets.
AMD's first really good OEM product (laptop/desktop) seems to be the coming 4000's APU's. All earlier products have certain weaknesses compared to Intel concerning OEM needs.
Don't misunderstand me, the products before are not bad, but not good enough to move major OEM product lines to AMD.
Especially 4000 APU for laptops looks promising.

And another thing to remember, AMD is competing with Intel, so we can be sure that Intel is adapting their OEM pricing (not list price) in order to not loose too much market share.
 

UsandThem

Elite Member
Super Moderator
May 4, 2000
13,515
4,156
146
And another thing to remember, AMD is competing with Intel, so we can be sure that Intel is adapting their OEM pricing (not list price) in order to not loose too much market share.
I agree.

Intel is a huge company with a lot of resources, so they're not going to make it easy for AMD (nor should they). Preventing AMD from gaining significant OEM contracts is something they have experience in, going back decades.

I was just surprised how small AMD's desktop market share gain was for the final quarter. With the Ryzen 3000 series, I really expected at least 1 - 2 % growth.
 

UsandThem

Elite Member
Super Moderator
May 4, 2000
13,515
4,156
146
AMD has raised prices for this latest generation and Intel has cut prices.
I mentioned that in another thread as well.

I think they went too big, too quickly with their prices this generation. While the products are good, it will take a lot longer than just a few years to change the perception of being the value alternative to Intel.
 
  • Like
Reactions: misuspita

itsmydamnation

Platinum Member
Feb 6, 2011
2,119
1,592
136
I mentioned that in another thread as well.

I think they went too big, too quickly with their prices this generation. While the products are good, it will take a lot longer than just a few years to change the perception of being the value alternative to Intel.
There highest price mainstream products are the ones hardest to purchase. The 3600 and the 3700 where a bit more expensive then i expected.
 

rainy

Senior member
Jul 17, 2013
443
271
136
Preventing AMD from gaining significant OEM contracts is something they have experience in, going back decades.
I hope you're not talking about their infamous business practices used against AMD during K7/K8 era.

AMD has raised prices for this latest generation and Intel has cut prices.
Not true: prices of 3600/3600x/3700x/3800x/3900x are exactly the same as 1600/1600x/1700/1700x/1800.
Only 3950x is an exception, simply because there's no equivalent in Summit Ridge family.

 

DrMrLordX

Lifer
Apr 27, 2000
16,506
5,480
136
Remember that the PC market is actually growing right now. That is a significant trend reversal (we'll see how long it lasts). In any case, it is possible for AMD to increase sales without gaining much market share in the face of an expanding market. Intel is selling everything they can make despite peddling generally-inferior products.
 

Arkaign

Lifer
Oct 27, 2006
20,565
1,042
126
Remember that the PC market is actually growing right now. That is a significant trend reversal (we'll see how long it lasts). In any case, it is possible for AMD to increase sales without gaining much market share in the face of an expanding market. Intel is selling everything they can make despite peddling generally-inferior products.
Indeed. While I'd like to see better prices, I'm not going to complain too much.

People forget that both AMD and Intel are nearly fully production limited at present. They could cut prices 50% and sell not even 1% more, because they're selling everything they can produce. And as noted, AMD can only supply so many 3xxx products, leaving OEMs to rely on who they can get most dependable numbers from, with AMD getting a handful of models by comparison.

It's one reason I believe AMD should invest in a new FAB, so they don't have to share extremely limited production capacity with other hungry companies lining up to the table. More product : more profit.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Tlh97 and piokos

UsandThem

Elite Member
Super Moderator
May 4, 2000
13,515
4,156
146
I hope you're not talking about their infamous business practices used against AMD during K7/K8 era.
That might be what I was referring to. ;)
Although even before that period, I remember buying my first motherboard for my K6-2 CPU, and the Asus motherboard was shipped in a generic white box (likely to not anger Intel).

Most corporations are pretty ruthless against competition, and don't go down without a fight.
 
Last edited:

Markfw

CPU Moderator, VC&G Moderator, Elite Member
Super Moderator
May 16, 2002
20,812
9,008
136
What I am more concerned with/irritated by, is "business as usual", even in light of security concerns/heat generation/performance of Intel CPU's, business still is not really adopting Rome , and due to security concerns in Intel, even Naples should be preferred. Even if they are making inroads to the data center, in light of all these facts, it should be happening faster. When I retired, all servers had a 3 year life span. PC's, servers, everything got refreshed in 3 years. So Naples should have started the conversion, and Rome accelerated it.

Mind you, my company alone had several square MILES of datacenter floor, and were security conscious to the max. The smallest patch had to go in, no security flaw was allowed to remain in any server.

I wish I had a way to find out what they are doing now, but since the phone is virtually useless to me(being deaf), I can't call my friends in the DBA group that knew everything that was going on in the datacenters.
 

moinmoin

Golden Member
Jun 1, 2017
1,944
2,212
106
Aside server market shares (where it essentially restarted from zero) I actually think AMD shares are fine right now. Of course they could be much higher considering the products currently on the market, and they will increase further. But one should keep in mind AMD is already punching above its weight as is, like AMD's total revenue is less than 10% of Intel's.
 

DooKey

Golden Member
Nov 9, 2005
1,636
288
126
https://www.tomshardware.com/news/amd-vs-intel-cpu-market-share-q4-2019-epyc-and-ryzen-growth-decelerate-mobile-ryzen-up

Their slowing market share growth surprised me honestly. With Intel's various security vulnerabilities, manufacturing shortages, 10nm set-backs, and CEO ouster were almost perfect storm for AMD to really gain a good chunk of the market.

AMD has really been on point with their products the last 4 years, but this data shows they have a huge uphill battle against Intel in the OEM markets.
I've said it all along that those thinking Intel was dead or dying were barking up the wrong tree. Intel inertia is HUGE. It's hard to break that in just a couple of years. Wishful thinking doesn't work.
 

UsandThem

Elite Member
Super Moderator
May 4, 2000
13,515
4,156
146
I've said it all along that those thinking Intel was dead or dying were barking up the wrong tree. Intel inertia is HUGE. It's hard to break that in just a couple of years. Wishful thinking doesn't work.
I agree, they aren't going anywhere anytime soon. It's their fight to lose honestly.

Plus, it doesn't help AMD's image when people post garbage like this on places like SlickDeals:
https://slickdeals.net/f/13840958-intel-core-i9-9900k-coffee-lake-3-6-ghz-lga-1151-429-99?page=2#commentsBox

7.jpg
 

Thunder 57

Golden Member
Aug 19, 2007
1,546
1,457
136
I agree, they aren't going anywhere anytime soon. It's their fight to lose honestly.

Plus, it doesn't help AMD's image when people post garbage like this on places like SlickDeals:
https://slickdeals.net/f/13840958-intel-core-i9-9900k-coffee-lake-3-6-ghz-lga-1151-429-99?page=2#commentsBox

View attachment 16739
I don't get why people can like/hate companies so much so spew such nonsense. Thankfully there's way more out there that are truthful and hopefully buyers figure out the bias.
 

UsandThem

Elite Member
Super Moderator
May 4, 2000
13,515
4,156
146
I don't get why people can like/hate companies so much so spew such nonsense. Thankfully there's way more out there that are truthful and hopefully buyers figure out the bias.
Yeah, I don't understand it either. I'm a fan of the best product I can get, for the least amount of money.

For example, I like Noctua products. They are pricey, but they are quality products. At the same time, I'm not rooting for them to control 90%+ of the cooling market, so I can end up paying more for less.
 

piokos

Senior member
Nov 2, 2018
554
202
76
Not true: prices of 3600/3600x/3700x/3800x/3900x are exactly the same as 1600/1600x/1700/1700x/1800.
Only 3950x is an exception, simply because there's no equivalent in Summit Ridge family.
You don't have to change MSRP to effectively raise prices.
It's enough to remove cheapest products from the lineup, make them less appealing or limit their availability.

AMD's ASP (Average Selling Price) is going up. It's in their reporting.
 

beginner99

Diamond Member
Jun 2, 2009
4,627
1,014
136
This thread saved me the search for previous similar one because I have something I have said often already

AMD from gaining significant OEM contracts is something they have experience in, going back decades.
True. Just go to an OEM site and see what they offer. More on that later.

What I am more concerned with/irritated by, is "business as usual", even in light of security concerns/heat generation/performance of Intel CPU's, business still is not really adopting Rome , and due to security concerns in Intel, even Naples should be preferred. Even if they are making inroads to the data center, in light of all these facts, it should be happening faster. When I retired, all servers had a 3 year life span. PC's, servers, everything got refreshed in 3 years. So Naples should have started the conversion, and Rome accelerated it.
In company I work for it's much more than 3 years. I have access to a Virtual machine on a server to do some compute (CPU) and long running stuff. That server runs a broadwell based Xeon.

This brings me right to the next point. Since they also run more important stuff on that server and me gobling up lots of CPU irregularly for hours lead to them reducing the cores for this VM from 8 to 4. 8 Wasn't great already but 4 is a joke so we started discussion for new hardware for my needs. And there is so much red tape and cluelessness it's infuriating.
I speced out a reasonable 32-core TR workstation which would cost around $8000 (with expensive GPU for deep learning). But no, can't do that because it's not standard and non-standard hardware can't be connected to the network (which is mandatory for accessing the data). hence it must be a server of a specific type from either of 2 big OEMs. The guy getting quotes has 0, absolutely 0 clue about hardware. Shocking. he said the only standard-compliant server with GPU they can offer would be a dual 28-core xeon platinum (sic) and you can only buy them in 2 nodes. He didn't mention a price but that thing would probably cost around 100k, is in some way completely overpowered but still slower in single-thread workloads. Discussion isn't finished but this is what AMD is competing with. Just having a good CPU at a good price doesn't mean all that much. This stuff can't be made up. BTW cloud is not an option because company policy also prohibit any kind of sensitive data to leave the company network.
 

piokos

Senior member
Nov 2, 2018
554
202
76
I speced out a reasonable 32-core TR workstation which would cost around $8000 (with expensive GPU for deep learning).
No offense, but you really think a company will let you use a DIY desktop?

You're pretty harsh on your collegues/managers for knowing little about PC hardware (which, I'd imagine, is not their job), but the joke is on you.
But no, can't do that because it's not standard and non-standard hardware can't be connected to the network (which is mandatory for accessing the data).
Which may be a valid reason as well. In case you wanted to buy a workstation from another OEM... not the DIY dreams.
Discussion isn't finished but this is what AMD is competing with.
There are also OEM workstations with AMD processors (both RACKs and normal desktops). Ask for one of these if you really can't live with a dual Xeon...
 

tamz_msc

Platinum Member
Jan 5, 2017
2,679
2,355
106
In company I work for it's much more than 3 years. I have access to a Virtual machine on a server to do some compute (CPU) and long running stuff. That server runs a broadwell based Xeon.

This brings me right to the next point. Since they also run more important stuff on that server and me gobling up lots of CPU irregularly for hours lead to them reducing the cores for this VM from 8 to 4. 8 Wasn't great already but 4 is a joke so we started discussion for new hardware for my needs. And there is so much red tape and cluelessness it's infuriating.
I speced out a reasonable 32-core TR workstation which would cost around $8000 (with expensive GPU for deep learning). But no, can't do that because it's not standard and non-standard hardware can't be connected to the network (which is mandatory for accessing the data). hence it must be a server of a specific type from either of 2 big OEMs. The guy getting quotes has 0, absolutely 0 clue about hardware. Shocking. he said the only standard-compliant server with GPU they can offer would be a dual 28-core xeon platinum (sic) and you can only buy them in 2 nodes. He didn't mention a price but that thing would probably cost around 100k, is in some way completely overpowered but still slower in single-thread workloads. Discussion isn't finished but this is what AMD is competing with. Just having a good CPU at a good price doesn't mean all that much. This stuff can't be made up. BTW cloud is not an option because company policy also prohibit any kind of sensitive data to leave the company network.
That and the vendors who interact with the IT guys must get kickbacks from the OEM to push Intel hardware because of Intel marketing.

AMD has no hope of substantially increasing their server market share when it has billions of dollars of Intel marketing development fund to contend with.
 

tamz_msc

Platinum Member
Jan 5, 2017
2,679
2,355
106
There are also OEM workstations with AMD processors (both RACKs and normal desktops). Ask for one of these if you really can't live with a dual Xeon...
It doesn't matter. The company probably contracted a vendor to supply hardware and vendors are at the mercy of OEMs, and indirectly Intel. The only option is to contact boutique establishments like PugetSystems or Pogo Linux or their equivalents in whatever country you happen to live in.
 

piokos

Senior member
Nov 2, 2018
554
202
76
It doesn't matter. The company probably contracted a vendor to supply hardware and vendors are at the mercy of OEMs, and indirectly Intel. The only option is to contact boutique establishments like PugetSystems or Pogo Linux or their equivalents in whatever country you happen to live in.
Yes, vendors are basically agents of OEMs. And OEMs use the platform that makes them more money - which is Intel right now.
So you can be angry with everyone other than AMD - for making money or prefering stuff they know.
Or you can be angry with AMD - for setting low prices and building an image of "budget brand", which makes it unattractive for 3rd party system builders and other middlemen.

But most importantly: both companies currently sell as many CPUs as they can make. AMD wants to rule DIY market. Intel prefers OEM market. Let them be. :)
 

Markfw

CPU Moderator, VC&G Moderator, Elite Member
Super Moderator
May 16, 2002
20,812
9,008
136
Yes, vendors are basically agents of OEMs. And OEMs use the platform that makes them more money - which is Intel right now.
So you can be angry with everyone other than AMD - for making money or prefering stuff they know.
Or you can be angry with AMD - for setting low prices and building an image of "budget brand", which makes it unattractive for 3rd party system builders and other middlemen.

But most importantly: both companies currently sell as many CPUs as they can make. AMD wants to rule DIY market. Intel prefers OEM market. Let them be. :)
Screw Intel. If they had a good product right now, I would not be saying this. But AMD rules every sector of the market by price and performance except high end gaming, and thats by a hair.
 

piokos

Senior member
Nov 2, 2018
554
202
76
Screw Intel. If they had a good product right now, I would not be saying this. But AMD rules every sector of the market by price and performance except high end gaming, and thats by a hair.
But would they "rule" as much if everything 7nm-based was 30% more expensive?
Intel's CPUs aren't bad. They're just slightly behind technologically at this point. They still work and do all the stuff we ask them to do. :)

Having a "good product" is actually the problem AMD is facing. A "good product" has to be attractive to distributors, stores and OEMs/agents if necessary. It has to be well known among the target consumer group.
For now AMD has a very well performing product (with very good value for the consumer). I wouldn't go further. :)
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS