Intel Expands CPU Market Share in Q3 to 84 Percent

[bioflex]

they owe it all to AMD for disappointing eager fans with their bulldozer proc release.

 

[sonofliberty08]

[citation][nom]ta152h[/nom]Cyrix is owned by VIA, so, in a way, you can get one if you buy a Nano. Except it's not a Cyrix. Cyrix did a great job of releasing the worst microprocessors for a long time, and were summarily executed by VIA. The Nano is based on the Centaur team (formerly at IDT) they also bought. The Cyrix design, naturally, was found inferior, so they stuck with the Centaur team. There is a third choice, and it's not a bad one. And it's kind of linked to Cyrix, but not horrible like Cyrix.[/citation]
the Nano are better than the crappy Atom, the are use in many POS system

 

[acerace]

Amd's 10.2% in current is due to its failure in bulldozer

You don't say?

Suck it AMD! What's that? The high end doesn't matter? It'll be a delicious slide to 0%, over the lamentations of ever more vision-less CEOs, and the qq of three quarters of the forum community on Toms hardware. Goodbye AMD, don't let the door hit your ass on the way out. And take your GPUs with you.

If you want AMD processor out in the market, I don't care. But not their GPU. Never.

Obvious fanboy is obvious. Trollers = monkeys.

 

[Dyseman]

Come on AMD, quit trying so hard for GREEN technology... Give me a processor that rocks and don't worry so much about having a Big Carbon Footprint and pump it up. It's winter! It will save on my Electric Bill by not running my heater so much! Summer time... well, I didn't think that far ahead but COME ON!
/runs of laughing

 

[iam2thecrowe]

if amd bring back a revised phenom II they may gain some ground in the mid range value market. But if they continue with this fx chip, they are going nowhere.

 

[ta152h]

[citation][nom]sonofliberty08[/nom]the Nano are better than the crappy Atom, the are use in many POS system[/citation]

I would buy a Nano based system if they would just get the CN1000 chipset out there. It's a nice processor, but they are so far behind on chipsets still. I don't know why the CN1000 is still not available, they released it for review over a year ago now 🙁 .

This article is not as clear as it should be. Keep in mind, we are not talking about processor market share the way most of us are used to. It's REVENUE market share. So, AMD's numbers seem quite low, but they are selling WAY more than 10.2% of the processors out there, but since they are selling for less than Intel's, the revenue market share is significantly lower. It could very well be that AMD's unit market share is up, since their best product is Bobcat, and it's a low cost product.

I would guess AMD is up for that reason, and Intel is losing Atom sales. Atom sales don't hurt revenue too much because they are cheap, but they do hurt market share in terms of units actually sold.

I wouldn't guess Intel will continue to gain even revenue market share, and will probably lose some revenue share and unit share, as AMD destroys them in the low-end with Bobcat. Atom simply is not competitive, and there's a real difference for most people between running an Atom and a Bobcat. The same can not be said for higher end processor, where most of them are more than powerful enough for the vast majority of people. As Bobcat continues to grow (and there's no reason it shouldn't, it's a perfect processor for so many people (low cost, low power, small footprint, adequate speed), it's going to keep getting design wins where Intel's magnificent Sandy Bridge processors are not necessary (and cost more), and where Intel's not so magnificent Atom just can't do the workload in a way people would want.

This looks like gloom and doom for AMD, but a lot of it reflects on the transition to the Bobcat, arguably their best processor design in their history.

Bulldozer isn't their significant technology. It sucks and will take them nowhere. But, Bobcat is a very significant technology that need to ride to their new position in the market.

We just have to hope Bulldozer's next iteration shows at least some promise. There's so little good to say about Bulldozer though, it's hard to even have that limited optimism. But, the design could have promise, even though the current implementation is miserable.

 

[Soul_keeper]

Nobody likes to praise the success of llano/fusion more than AMD themselves, this could be their failure imo.
As promising as llano/fusion are, Intel I3/I5 is still atleast as good on performance and price.
Also AMD needs to embrace the enthusiast/overclocking community, we are more loyal/powerful than we get credit for. __Partially__ unlocked K-series llanos is an example of this.

Here is to hoping trinity is better in every way.

 

[metallifux]

[citation][nom]de5_roy[/nom]amd's bulldozer (zambezi and others) tanking has to do something with intel's rise. this possibly means bulldozer didn't sell as much as amd is hyping, and eol'ing old cpus is also hurting.as a result intel is getting lazier and lazier. cpu prices are stagnant. new products are getting delayed.[/citation]

I think there were probably a lot of people like me who wanted bulldozer to kick ass and when it sucked we jumped ship. On the i5-2500k train and liking it!

 

[LLJones]

I will be adding to the intel climb/amd drop. I have been patient from before the 750 thunderbird days.
Ditto with ATI. I will never call them amd. One paid off, one failed miserably. This summer my ATI Crossfire Spider Edition case will be boasting dual ATI and an intel cpu. amd may pull something out, but then again JC is supposed to be around as well. Not betting on which will happen first.

 

[kronos_cornelius]

Bulldozer will shine once they increase the core count. The problem is they looked too far to the future. However, Fusion and the ATI branch should be enough to help AMD survive until Bulldozer cores-up.

 

[intel4eva]

[citation][nom]kronos_cornelius[/nom]Bulldozer will shine once they increase the core count. The problem is they looked too far to the future. However, Fusion and the ATI branch should be enough to help AMD survive until Bulldozer cores-up.[/citation]

Ah, but of course! Needs moar coars! How could they have missed that? 8 is not enough. Maybe with 16, or 32 cores they can match a 4 core i7. In cinebench. And maybe handbrake.

 

[intel4eva]

[citation][nom]acerace[/nom]You don't say?If you want AMD processor out in the market, I don't care. But not their GPU. Never.Obvious fanboy is obvious. Trollers = monkeys.[/citation]

Actually I own a 6970 trifire, and before that I had 5870 trifire. But I've had it with their driver support, and condescending attitude towards their customers. CCC is full of problems that would be super easy and quick to fix and AMD knows about them but won't do anything. Like, just as a small example, not being able to change the GPU panel scaling options without first bringing down your desktop resolution to 1024x768. Don't believe me? Go check right now, I assume you're also running an AMD GPU.

Secondly, I don't want AMD out of the market, or the gubbimint will break intel up. That's axiomatic. But I deeply enjoy AMD getting financially kicked in the gut given their FU attitude to us enthusiasts. After the lies and deceit of bulldozer, what do they do, apologise and hit R&D with a passion? No, they claim the high end doesn't matter, and they fire a bunch of people, to "streamline". I guess that means even less people working on AMD GPU drivers. For me, that's it. I'm out.

 

[intel4eva]

[citation][nom]metallifux[/nom]I think there were probably a lot of people like me who wanted bulldozer to kick ass and when it sucked we jumped ship. On the i5-2500k train and liking it![/citation]

If AMD didn't troll you, you could have been on the 2500K train for almost a full YEAR, and for the same money.

 

[de5_Roy]

I think there were probably a lot of people like me who wanted bulldozer to kick ass and when it sucked we jumped ship. On the i5-2500k train and liking it!

i wanted zambezi to be at least competitive with pricing since amd's cpus always perform lower than intel's, but they offset that with price. believe it or not, amd's idea of multithreading seemed to be much better (than intel's) in theory. in synthetic, highly threaded benchmarks that shows sometimes, but not it real life. amd screwed up the implementation among other things. recent info on them bottlenecking gfx cards isn't helping them either. the price and power efficiency pretty much placed zambezi in the crap pile.
i agree with the silverblue, bd has little to do with amd's share shrinkage since it came out in q4. still, amd had llano apus.... glofo had problems with supplying enough of them. may be bobcat didn't sell enough as the netbook market is losing share to tablets.

 

[Usersname]

Be very afraid.

 

[JohnnyLucky]

In the meantime news reports indicate the Chinese are entering the cpu market!!!

 

[eddieroolz]

A few people I've known held out for Bulldozer, only to decide to go with Intel after seeing the initial reviews. I'd figure this phenomenon wasn't confined to my circle of friends, and this also helps to explain the rise.