News AMD vs. Intel CPU Market Share: 7nm Makes Landfall as Price War Begins

Ninjawithagun

Distinguished
Aug 28, 2007
714
9
19,165
70
Um, nothing has made it "to shore" yet. I can't find the 3950X for sale anywhere...WTF? Let me guess...we the consumers are going to have to live through retail hell again just like when the 3900X was released. Sold out in 30 seconds, with follow-up stock trickling in a few CPUs at a time over a period of several months. UGH!
 
but it appears Intel's strategy is to use price cuts rather than innovative new products.
Yes sure,because using SSDs as RAM is soooo old school and having CPUs on m.2 boards pfft please such lack of innovation....

intel made as much money from their innovation lacking optane dimms as AMD made from all of their innovative CPU and GPU sales combined.
https://www.anandtech.com/show/15030/intel-announces-q3-fy-2019-earnings-record-results
Non-Volatile Memory Solutions Group
$1.3B​
https://seekingalpha.com/pr/17679175-amd-reports-third-quarter-2019-financial-results
Computing and Graphics segment revenue was $1.28 billion, up 36 percent year-over-year and sequentially. Higher revenue was primarily driven by increased Ryzen client processor sales.
 

TJ Hooker

Illustrious
Herald
Um, nothing has made it "to shore" yet. I can't find the 3950X for sale anywhere...WTF? Let me guess...we the consumers are going to have to live through retail hell again just like when the 3900X was released. Sold out in 30 seconds, with follow-up stock trickling in a few CPUs at a time over a period of several months. UGH!
The 3950X doesn't go on sale until Nov 25...
 

joeblowsmynose

Distinguished
Jun 14, 2011
269
94
18,860
0
Yes sure,because using SSDs as RAM is soooo old school and having CPUs on m.2 boards pfft please such lack of innovation....

intel made as much money from their innovation lacking optane dimms as AMD made from all of their innovative CPU and GPU sales combined.
https://www.anandtech.com/show/15030/intel-announces-q3-fy-2019-earnings-record-results
Non-Volatile Memory Solutions Group
$1.3B​

https://seekingalpha.com/pr/17679175-amd-reports-third-quarter-2019-financial-results
Computing and Graphics segment revenue was $1.28 billion, up 36 percent year-over-year and sequentially. Higher revenue was primarily driven by increased Ryzen client processor sales.
You don't need to reduce yourself to defending Intel by exclaiming how much money they have ... they still win at bottle-necked CPU gaming and have quicksync, you know. ;)
 

TJ Hooker

Illustrious
Herald
Yes sure,because using SSDs as RAM is soooo old school and having CPUs on m.2 boards pfft please such lack of innovation....

intel made as much money from their innovation lacking optane dimms as AMD made from all of their innovative CPU and GPU sales combined.
https://www.anandtech.com/show/15030/intel-announces-q3-fy-2019-earnings-record-results
Non-Volatile Memory Solutions Group
$1.3B​

https://seekingalpha.com/pr/17679175-amd-reports-third-quarter-2019-financial-results
Computing and Graphics segment revenue was $1.28 billion, up 36 percent year-over-year and sequentially. Higher revenue was primarily driven by increased Ryzen client processor sales.
This article seems to be focusing solely on CPUs, not other products.
 
Aug 4, 2019
9
6
15
0
Um, nothing has made it "to shore" yet. I can't find the 3950X for sale anywhere...WTF? Let me guess...we the consumers are going to have to live through retail hell again just like when the 3900X was released. Sold out in 30 seconds, with follow-up stock trickling in a few CPUs at a time over a period of several months. UGH!
Try reading a 3950 preview, guy. The CPUs won't be available until Nov 25th.
 
Aug 4, 2019
9
6
15
0
Also, AMD said it has no intention of lowering its prices--a perfectly rational move. Intel is selling old architectures riddled with security holes and made on the old 14nm process. Of course, Intel should halve its prices, at the very least...;)
 
Reactions: keith12
May 31, 2019
28
9
35
0
The HPC computer deals go out a couple of years. Intel will have pcie4 in 2020 and perhaps pcie5 in 2021, along with CXL. I don't think it is a big factor for HPC contracts that Intel doesn't have PCIE4 today.
 
May 31, 2019
28
9
35
0
I believe Lisa Su's comment were that the apus would be "popping up" in early 2020 ... whatever that means. If she had said "shipping in volume", then perhaps you could expect to be purchasing products with them six months later.
 
May 31, 2019
28
9
35
0
While AMD's new apus are "popping up", Intel also has a next generation 10nm laptop chip on their roadmap, Tiger Lake, with an updated Willow Cove cpu and a new 10nm integrated Xe gpu.

Intel also has a sizeable lead in laptop chip integration, with their laptop chips including wifi6, thunderbolt 3, optane support and per core avx512.

Intel is also expanding mobile space with the Lakefield chip, which already has design-ins next year for Surface Neo and Samsung Galaxy Book S. These chips should also be able to find their way into lowest power laptops.

For these reasons, I think it will be hard for AMD to gain much market share in laptop chips. If anything, that Xe gpu might be expected to take market share from discrete laptop gpus.
 
Yes this is pretty much the problem with almost all articles about ZEN, they only focus on the very narrow piece of the pie where they do well and ignore everything else.
The article is about CPU market share and a possible price war. It's kind of like complaining about why this article only talks about CPUs, and not luxury cars.

Or, sure, let's talk about things other than this "narrow piece of the pie CPU stuff" and discuss GPUs here as well. So, AMD is absolutely CRUSHING Intel there.

Is that what you were looking for?
 
Reactions: AlistairAB
The article is about CPU market share and a possible price war.
You only get a price war if the companies are forced to reduce prices,if any of the companies can compensate any losses from one sector with winnings from another they don't need to enter a price war.
And there aren't even any losses in the CPU sector for neither intel or AMD, both of them can't even make enough CPUs to sell and both just had record quarters.
 
You only get a price war if the companies are forced to reduce prices,if any of the companies can compensate any losses from one sector with winnings from another they don't need to enter a price war.
And there aren't even any losses in the CPU sector for neither intel or AMD, both of them can't even make enough CPUs to sell and both just had record quarters.
I guess you might need to tell Intel that, since they seem to be gearing up for exactly the thing you say they don't need to do.
 
I guess you might need to tell Intel that, since they seem to be gearing up for exactly the thing you say they don't need to do.
Adjusting prices once after what ten years?! is very different from a price war,increasing specs is also nothing new,decreasing the price of the F models is something that should have been done before release and not a year later,or however long ago they released.Intel is doing the exact opposite of a price war they are milking it for everything.
AMD makes a price war by and against themselves because they lower prices of nearly everything after 6 or so months.
To have a price war you need them to underbid each other and not themselves, multiple times.
 
Adjusting prices once after what ten years?! is very different from a price war,increasing specs is also nothing new,decreasing the price of the F models is something that should have been done before release and not a year later,or however long ago they released.Intel is doing the exact opposite of a price war they are milking it for everything.
AMD makes a price war by and against themselves because they lower prices of nearly everything after 6 or so months.
To have a price war you need them to underbid each other and not themselves, multiple times.
What you're saying only makes sense if AMD's CPUs had the same level of price/performance as Intel. That is not the case.

Therefore, in response, Intel is starting price cuts that, prior to Ryzen, they did not feel the need to do for years.

If they lower the prices enough, you don't think AMD will lower their prices in return? And then Intel doing so again?

How do you get that they're underbidding themselves, and not each other?

Also, multiple times may well happen - a price war BEGINS is the title, so, you're complaining that it can't be beginning because it hasn't been in progress through multiple stages already?
 
Yes sure,because using SSDs as RAM is soooo old school and having CPUs on m.2 boards pfft please such lack of innovation....

intel made as much money from their innovation lacking optane dimms as AMD made from all of their innovative CPU and GPU sales combined.
https://www.anandtech.com/show/15030/intel-announces-q3-fy-2019-earnings-record-results
Non-Volatile Memory Solutions Group
$1.3B​

https://seekingalpha.com/pr/17679175-amd-reports-third-quarter-2019-financial-results
Computing and Graphics segment revenue was $1.28 billion, up 36 percent year-over-year and sequentially. Higher revenue was primarily driven by increased Ryzen client processor sales.
In the CPU space which this article is talking about, Intel has fallen behind. If all goes as planned AMD will have moved to three new nodes 12nm, 7nm, and 7nm+ while Intel is still on 14nm and the same old tweaked architecture. I have a feeling once AMD is on 7nm+ Intel will start feeling much more pain as that node should reach higher frequencies which is what is saving Intel right now having a much more mature node. Intel has some of the best engineers so I'm certain once they get there foundry woes worked out they will be back at the top but they certainly are not now. Just because one company is many times larger doesn't mean they are innovating.
 

joeblowsmynose

Distinguished
Jun 14, 2011
269
94
18,860
0
You only get a price war if the companies are forced to reduce prices,if any of the companies can compensate any losses from one sector with winnings from another they don't need to enter a price war.
...
SkylakeX and Cascade lakeX just got their prices slashed in half, and you can now get 100% more cores for the same price with Intel's flagship mainstream desktop parts, not to mention 9900k just saw a price reduction when the KS came out. ... If you are saying Intel has no need to enter a price war because they are strong elsewhere, what then, is the motivation for these actions? You are contradicting the reality that Intel is slashing prices to try to compete with AMDs more innovative CPUs.

But if you are saying something along the lines of AMD can't compete with the innovations Intel is putting into their modems, for example, then yes you are right. AMD can't innovate as well with products they don't make ... thanks for pointing that out captain obvious.

I guess you could call that a win for Intel, but it would be like saying, as King_V suggested, Intel simply is not innovative or competitive in console making, or not innovative or competitive in discrete GPUs ... no one would even try to make those arguments, due to the obvious fallacy.
 
Reactions: King_V

kinggremlin

Distinguished
Jul 14, 2009
571
37
19,010
0
SkylakeX and Cascade lakeX just got their prices slashed in half, and you can now get 100% more cores for the same price with Intel's flagship mainstream desktop parts, not to mention 9900k just saw a price reduction when the KS came out. ...
9900k did not get an official price cut. List price is still $488 which it has been at for a while.

https://camelcamelcamel.com/Intel-i9-9900K-Desktop-Processor-unlocked/product/B005404P9I

Looks like it's about $3 cheaper than it was in late September. That's a pretty crappy price cut.

HEDT is the only area Intel has made any significant price cuts and those account for about 0% of Intel's revenue, so they aren't going to be hurt by those. The industry shortages has really prevented any need for Intel to make any major across the board price cuts. The bulk of Intel's CPU revenue is from Xeon's and mobile, and neither has seen any price movement. From a consumer perspective, it is really disappointing how little response has been necessary from Intel up to this point to the new competition from AMD due to current market conditions.
 

joeblowsmynose

Distinguished
Jun 14, 2011
269
94
18,860
0
9900k did not get an official price cut. List price is still $488 which it has been at for a while.

https://camelcamelcamel.com/Intel-i9-9900K-Desktop-Processor-unlocked/product/B005404P9I

Looks like it's about $3 cheaper than it was in late September. That's a pretty crappy price cut.

HEDT is the only area Intel has made any significant price cuts and those account for about 0% of Intel's revenue, so they aren't going to be hurt by those. ...
I guess you are saying that since the pricing of their HEDT makes literally no difference because no one in their right mind would actually buy one of these with what AMD is offering in mainstream (3950x looks to best the 9980XE in many, if not most, scenarios including gaming) and what TR3 has on offer, then Intel must be slashing their pricing just because they just wanted to cheapen their brand in the eyes of the consumer and their shareholders. You know, because Intel is always looking for ways to cheapen their brand image in relationship to AMD - especially as a strong statement to their shareholders ... that makes sense, right?

My question that I proposed to Terry has not been answered .... why did Intel slash all their HEDT prices in half, if it wasn't to concede the victory to AMDs innovative products, and attempt to retain at least some of these sales. If Intel truly sells zero of these parts and truly doesn't care about their HEDT sales ... why did they cut prices in half when they could have left them and not cheapened their brand?

You guys aren't thinking straight ...


The answer to the above is not that Intel wants to cheapen their brand, because obviously if you look at all their actions, they avoid doing that at all and any possible cost including past illegal actions; but rather, that AMD has forced the cheapening the Intel brand with better and more innovative CPUs.

It can't be that hard to admit ... can it?
 

kinggremlin

Distinguished
Jul 14, 2009
571
37
19,010
0
I guess you are saying that since the pricing of their HEDT makes literally no difference because no one in their right mind would actually buy one of these with what AMD is offering in mainstream (3950x looks to best the 9980XE in many, if not most, scenarios including gaming) and what TR3 has on offer, then Intel must be slashing their pricing just because they just wanted to cheapen their brand in the eyes of the consumer and their shareholders. You know, because Intel is always looking for ways to cheapen their brand image in relationship to AMD - especially as a strong statement to their shareholders ... that makes sense, right?

My question that I proposed to Terry has not been answered .... why did Intel slash all their HEDT prices in half, if it wasn't to concede the victory to AMDs innovative products, and attempt to retain at least some of these sales. If Intel truly sells zero of these parts and truly doesn't care about their HEDT sales ... why did they cut prices in half when they could have left them and not cheapened their brand?

You guys aren't thinking straight ...


The answer to the above is not that Intel wants to cheapen their brand, because obviously if you look at all their actions, they avoid doing that at all and any possible cost including past illegal actions; but rather, that AMD has forced the cheapening the Intel brand with better and more innovative CPUs.

It can't be that hard to admit ... can it?
I believe it was the late 90's that Bill Gates compared the computer industry to other industries and made the point that if innovation had progressed at the same rate, a mid sized car would cost $27 and a box of cereal would cost 1 cent. The break neck pace that performance improved and prices dropped did not cheapen Intel's brand. Intel and AMD used to cut prices across the board twice a year. That practice didn't cheapen Intel's brand. When a new series was announced, the old one used to go in the bargain bin with big price cuts. Didn't cheapen Intel's brand. The simple act of dropping prices does not cheapen a brand on its own if it is in step with others in the industry.

Fast forward about dozen years to 2011 and the top of the line mainstream Sandy Bridge 2700k is released. 4 cores 8 threads, overclock ~4.8Ghz, MSRP $339. 6 years after that in 2017, top of the line mainstream Kaby Lake 7700K is released. 4 cores 8 threads, overclock ~5.0 Ghz, MSRP$339. IPC improvement from Sandy Bridge to Kaby Lake is about 20-25%. That is not remotely the rate of price/performance improvement Bill Gates calculated in the late 90's. Comparatively, it's pretty much stagnant.

While AMD had their head up their ass all this time, Intel created a pricing bubble. When Intel added cores rather than dropping everything down a rung, they added an additional pricing tier at the top. Top of the line, now 6 core, 8700k was bumped slightly to $359. Top of the 9900k released, 8 cores, jumped to $499. This was taken to an extreme level in the HEDT segment, where the top of the line went from $1000 for years, then suddenly shot up as core counts increased up to $2000 for an 18 core.

Intel had to drop prices in HEDT, because you can't charge 2 to 3 times more for basically the same product that your only competitor is selling. The severe price cuts are a market correction brought on by competition from AMD, to where prices should have been had AMD been competing all along. These price cuts don't cheapen the Intel brand because they don't undercut AMD anywhere. You can still get more for less from AMD. A company cheapens their brand by consistently undercutting the competition and using that as their main advertising message. AMD has done that for decades which is why they are viewed everywhere as a bargain brand, and no one has interest in buying their products unless you get more for less than from Intel and Nvidia.

AMD still has a pretty significant price performance advantage in the mainstream with the recently released 3000 series. But it isn't to the severe gouging degree that it was in the HEDT market. Intel's only price response was to drop prices on the KF/F models which have no iGPU and absurdly didn't cost any less than their sibling model that did have the iGPU. Contrary to what you said, Intel did not drop the price on the 9900k or any model that has an iGPU:

https://www.anandtech.com/show/14941/intel-announces-price-cut-for-9th-generation-f-and-kf-processors

Instead they added the 9900KS which surprise surprise, increases the price of the topend mainstream even further to $513 from $339 it was at less than 3 years ago. As far as Intel is currently concerned, whatever price/performance advantage AMD currently has at the mainstream level, which is pretty significant from top to bottom, it isn't big enough for them to make any real price adjustments.
 
Nov 11, 2019
1
0
10
0
Are the Mercury Research market share numbers shown specifically for Q3 shipments only?

Or is it overall as of end of Q3 which would have more historical data included?

Greatly appreciated.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS