AMD dominates Amazon's best-selling CPU chart, taking 19 of the top 20 spots

[midian182]

In brief: AMD dominated Amazon's best-selling CPU chart back in November 2024, taking the top 12 spots. But has Team Red managed to hold on to that momentum over a year later? Today, the top 14 best-selling Amazon processors are AMD models, and they make up 19 of the top 20 CPUs.

It's not surprising to find that the Ryzen 7 9800X3D is the most popular processor on Amazon.com right now. The chip we called the New Gaming King in our review last year is listed for $469 – only slightly more than its $450 MSRP.

Elsewhere in Amazon's top ten, the Ryzen 7 7800X3D shows its enduring popularity by taking the third spot. We praised the Zen 4 3D V-Cache CPU for its speed and gaming efficiency in 2023.

The rest of the top twenty are made up of Zen 5, Zen 4, and Zen 3 AMD CPUs. Even the Zen 2 Ryzen 5 3600 appears in seventh place.

There's only one Intel processor in the top 20: the Core i9 -14900K. That's not much of a shock as Arrow Lake proved to be a major disappointment from Team Blue. In our 14900K vs. Core Ultra 9 285K comparison feature, we found that the older 14th-gen CPU offered the better gaming performance.

Must read: The Best CPUs

AMD still dominates outside of Amazon's top 20, taking four of the six spots between 21 and 26. Intel's 12900K and 12600K account for the remaining two.

It's not just Amazon's chart where AMD is making huge strides. November saw it reach yet another record-high user share in the Steam survey. 42.6% of participants now have Red processors in their devices, up from 33.8% a year earlier. At this rate, AMD will surpass Intel for the first time ever sometime next year.

AMD is also dominating overseas. German retail giant Mindfactory sold 2,260 AMD CPUs in one week in November compared to just 220 from Intel. AMD also took a massive 90% share of the revenue, and the Ryzen 7 9800X3D was the most popular CPU. Mindfactory does have a reputation for favoring AMD, offering promotions, discounts, and bundles featuring its products, but AMD's success is obvious wherever you look.

It was recently reported that Ryzen 7 5800X3D chips were selling on eBay for up to $800, more than the new 9800X3D is currently selling for. AM4 is the only AMD platform that supports DDR4, and with DDR5 prices through the roof, many gamers are trying to save money by opting for the older processors.

Permalink to story:

AMD dominates Amazon's best-selling CPU chart, taking 19 of the top 20 spots

 

[Rapob]

Yeah Intel won't have anything till Nova Lake + bLLC Chips

Arrow Flop and Refresh will be irellevant, as Intel changes socket again with Nova Lake

The exploding RAM prices will be a huge problem for Intel, as many won't build a new platform if RAM cost is half of the budget

 

[CapNemo72]

In the meantime, Intel outsells AMD in business market, probably, at least 5:1 (just look at Dell and HP offerings). In most companies, OEMs offer first Intel based systems, and IT usually just accepts then order. Millions and millions of computers are sold like this. Not based on performance or price, but simply because Intel probably makes "interesting" for OEMs to push their CPUs.
Also, look at Dell AMD offerings, many laptop models can have maximum 16Gb of memory?!
Or tower desktops can only have 8600G or 8700G CPUs, and no discreet GPU. In a medium sized tower box!

It is obvious that there is something going on, and fro the history..we can just imagine

 

[Rapob]

In the meantime, Intel outsells AMD in business market, probably, at least 5:1 (just look at Dell and HP offerings). In most companies, OEMs offer first Intel based systems, and IT usually just accepts then order. Millions and millions of computers are sold like this. Not based on performance or price, but simply because Intel probably makes "interesting" for OEMs to push their CPUs.
Also, look at Dell AMD offerings, many laptop models can have maximum 16Gb of memory?!
Or tower desktops can only have 8600G or 8700G CPUs, and no discreet GPU. In a medium sized tower box!

It is obvious that there is something going on, and fro the history..we can just imagine

AMD is gaining fast in the laptop and business market. Most servers sold now, are AMD as well. EPYC destroys Xeon. Intel is struggling hard in the server market actually. This market is way more profitable than the business laptop market. Most of Microsoft, Amazon like Azure and AWS datacenters are EPYC based. Insanely scalability. Linux clusters. Intel dropped the ball here years ago.

AMD wins on performance but more importantly (for the companies) AMD wins big on performance per dollar and provides more cores per dollar as well. Cores are extremely important for these datacenters, where customers often pay per core/specs (VM clusters)

If you talk about OEM machines made for regular consumers/gamers, they are mostly trash. Cheap CPUs paired with cheap GPUs (or no dGPU at all - sometimes APUs are used), cheap trashy motherboards with limited connectivity + an even cheaper PSU that might work for a few years. AMD gains here too tho. Little money in this market. The winners are the companies building and selling the actual finished machines but margins are not great.

Intel is loosing more and more marketshare in all areas. They have for years.
Even Intel fanboys are slowly going AMD these days. Gamers, looks at X3D and nothing else really. Demanding users, looks at 16C/32T Ryzens or even Threadripper which is HEDT and Intel has nothing that matches it really.

So yeah, Intel is not winning in many areas now. They are slowly getting better (future looks decent) but they need to get 18A + 14A to work ASAP to be somewhat competitive again.

Intel can't rely on TSMC. We need another big player. Intel needs to make their own chips and they also need to make chips for others really. 18A and 14A is the clear hope. If both fail, it won't be pretty.

Now Intel just have to deliver, instead of just talking about these nodes.

 

[meric]

In the meantime, Intel outsells AMD in business market, probably, at least 5:1 (just look at Dell and HP offerings). In most companies, OEMs offer first Intel based systems, and IT usually just accepts then order. Millions and millions of computers are sold like this. Not based on performance or price, but simply because Intel probably makes "interesting" for OEMs to push their CPUs.
Also, look at Dell AMD offerings, many laptop models can have maximum 16Gb of memory?!
Or tower desktops can only have 8600G or 8700G CPUs, and no discreet GPU. In a medium sized tower box!

It is obvious that there is something going on, and fro the history..we can just imagine

intel has always been known for their "good" relationship with OEM providers. Yes they are still the preferred brand by the OEMs and sell millions of chips but does that provide the high margins that will be enough to keep them afloat? Intel probably offers huge kickbacks, promotions, discounts etc to keep the sales numbers high but they are steadily losing ground in server and work-station market which is the most important market for them. Let's hope their partnership with Nvidia yields good products.

 

[Str8Shot]

Intel is on life-support, hence the slow government takeover, I mean 10% stake in the company.

 

[Rapob]

intel has always been known for their "good" relationship with OEM providers. Yes they are still the preferred brand by the OEMs and sell millions of chips but does that provide the high margins that will be enough to keep them afloat? Intel probably offers huge kickbacks, promotions, discounts etc to keep the sales numbers high but they are steadily losing ground in server and work-station market which is the most important market for them. Let's hope their partnership with Nvidia yields good products.

They do, without a question. OEMs usually buy Intel because Intel is actually cheaper than AMD on average. OEMs still mostly buy 13th and 14th gen after all, old tech, all made at Intels own fabs at "Intel 7" which is 10nm, cutting out the TSMC middle, they need to make Arrow Lake and Lunar Lake.

And this is why Intel needs to make their own chips. We don't need another big player relying 100% on TSMC really.

I could see Nvidia consumer GPUs and maybe even AMD products using Intel 18A/14A in the coming years.

TSMC is getting more and more expensive. Even Apple considers leaving, for cheaper alternatives.

If Intel 18A/14A is actually viable, alot of pressure will be removed from TSMC, and this will mean lower prices for all. TSMC increased prices alot in the last years. They skim the milk too.

 

[Theinsanegamer]

AMD is gaining fast in the laptop and business market. Most servers sold now, are AMD as well. EPYC destroys Xeon. Intel is struggling hard in the server market actually. This market is way more profitable than the business laptop market. Most of Microsoft, Amazon like Azure and AWS datacenters are EPYC based. Insanely scalability. Linux clusters. Intel dropped the ball here years ago.

AMD wins on performance but more importantly (for the companies) AMD wins big on performance per dollar and provides more cores per dollar as well. Cores are extremely important for these datacenters, where customers often pay per core/specs (VM clusters)

If you talk about OEM machines made for regular consumers/gamers, they are mostly trash. Cheap CPUs paired with cheap GPUs (or no dGPU at all - sometimes APUs are used), cheap trashy motherboards with limited connectivity + an even cheaper PSU that might work for a few years. AMD gains here too tho. Little money in this market. The winners are the companies building and selling the actual finished machines but margins are not great.

Intel is loosing more and more marketshare in all areas. They have for years.
Even Intel fanboys are slowly going AMD these days. Gamers, looks at X3D and nothing else really. Demanding users, looks at 16C/32T Ryzens or even Threadripper which is HEDT and Intel has nothing that matches it really.

So yeah, Intel is not winning in many areas now. They are slowly getting better (future looks decent) but they need to get 18A + 14A to work ASAP to be somewhat competitive again.

Intel can't rely on TSMC. We need another big player. Intel needs to make their own chips and they also need to make chips for others really. 18A and 14A is the clear hope. If both fail, it won't be pretty.

Now Intel just have to deliver, instead of just talking about these nodes.

*Losing. Loosing isnt a word.

Epyc is still a minority player with 38% market share. More importantly, it commands 44% of server revenue, so AMD is selling for a premium while Intel is having to offer significant discounts.

The price of pre built a is irrelevant to CPU sales. It's far too early to call Intel out. Sure they have had a very rough half decade but they still have a dominant market position and if they could pull their head from their collective are they can put AMD back on the defensive.

 

[Rapob]

*Losing. Loosing isnt a word.

Epyc is still a minority player with 38% market share. More importantly, it commands 44% of server revenue, so AMD is selling for a premium while Intel is having to offer significant discounts.

The price of pre built a is irrelevant to CPU sales. It's far too early to call Intel out. Sure they e had a very rough half decade but they still have a dominant market position and if they could pull their head from their collective are they can put AMD back on the defensive.

It is called a typo.

Look up financial reports.
AMD has higher server/enterprise revenue than Intel now. This is what matters, not actual marketshare.

Higher sales, means companies are going with AMD.

EPYC dominate datacenters but they change out hardware slowly. All new hardware is pretty much AMD at this point. So Intels marketshare, mostly comes from old servers, about to be replaced, by AMD hardware. Unless Intel wakes up, fast.

Intel faces major compeition. Obviously.

Also, ARM is coming for the enterprise market as well. ARM sits at like 10% now, climbing to 20-25% in the next 5-10 years probably.

 

[bviktor]

Nature is healing.

 

[gdavid65]

It was recently reported that Ryzen 7 5800X3D chips were selling on eBay for up to $800, more than the new 9800X3D is currently selling for. AM4 is the only AMD platform that supports DDR4, and with DDR5 prices through the roof, many gamers are trying to save money by opting for the older processors.

I believe it. I sold my 5700X3D for the price I bought it for 12 months ago... I managed to get some DDR5 for a good price, so the 9800X3D upgrade turned out to be a fairly minimal cost. Lets hope my DDR5 doesn't blow up in the next year or so though

 

[meric]

They do, without a question. OEMs usually buy Intel because Intel is actually cheaper than AMD on average. OEMs still mostly buy 13th and 14th gen after all, old tech, all made at Intels own fabs at "Intel 7" which is 10nm, cutting out the TSMC middle, they need to make Arrow Lake and Lunar Lake.

And this is why Intel needs to make their own chips. We don't need another big player relying 100% on TSMC really.

I could see Nvidia consumer GPUs and maybe even AMD products using Intel 18A/14A in the coming years.

TSMC is getting more and more expensive. Even Apple considers leaving, for cheaper alternatives.

If Intel 18A/14A is actually viable, alot of pressure will be removed from TSMC, and this will mean lower prices for all. TSMC increased prices alot in the last years. They skim the milk too.

I do hope that intel delivers what they promise. But think about this, even if intel delivers and delivers on time, will the wafers made in US be price-competitive, world-wide? This is, if we assume that TSCM doesn't come up with a better offering. Either way it's of course better to have 2 major producers instead of 1.

 

[sreams]

*Losing. Loosing isnt a word.

"Loosing" *is* a word. It just isn't the one this person intended to use.

 

[Y2JB47]

I’ve built 3 gaming pc’s over the past 12 months and I didn’t even consider intel. They seem so far behind with no obvious way of catching up. Add to this the Trump administration being close to them and I would simply never give them my money.

 

[poohbear]

In the meantime, Intel outsells AMD in business market, probably, at least 5:1 (just look at Dell and HP offerings). In most companies, OEMs offer first Intel based systems, and IT usually just accepts then order. Millions and millions of computers are sold like this. Not based on performance or price, but simply because Intel probably makes "interesting" for OEMs to push their CPUs.
Also, look at Dell AMD offerings, many laptop models can have maximum 16Gb of memory?!
Or tower desktops can only have 8600G or 8700G CPUs, and no discreet GPU. In a medium sized tower box!

It is obvious that there is something going on, and fro the history..we can just imagine

Yes, that's why intel doesn't care about gaming performance. Their CPUs are supposed to be more efficient with the newer CPUs, but not more powerful. This is super important for laptops, and that was the focus of that CPU generation. For the vast majority of users, that's actually more important than the gaming ability of the 9xxx CPUs with their V-Cache memory .

 

[agentnate009]

*Losing. Loosing isnt a word.

Epyc is still a minority player with 38% market share. More importantly, it commands 44% of server revenue, so AMD is selling for a premium while Intel is having to offer significant discounts.

The price of pre built a is irrelevant to CPU sales. It's far too early to call Intel out. Sure they have had a very rough half decade but they still have a dominant market position and if they could pull their head from their collective are they can put AMD back on the defensive.

"Loosing" is a frequent typo. You misspelled "arse" yourself.

AMD is making consistent gains in all areas of PC hardware. Intel does need to get with the program, but I doubt that will happen anytime soon. AMD is offering what people/companies want to throw money at. The graphics division... Well, that is another matter for them with taking on Nvidia. They are not doing so hot there, but at least they are offering some competition and hopefully getting their act together in this area.

 

[SRB]

In the meantime, Intel outsells AMD in business market, probably, at least 5:1 (just look at Dell and HP offerings). In most companies, OEMs offer first Intel based systems, and IT usually just accepts then order. Millions and millions of computers are sold like this. Not based on performance or price, but simply because Intel probably makes "interesting" for OEMs to push their CPUs.
Also, look at Dell AMD offerings, many laptop models can have maximum 16Gb of memory?!
Or tower desktops can only have 8600G or 8700G CPUs, and no discreet GPU. In a medium sized tower box!

It is obvious that there is something going on, and fro the history..we can just imagine

You have to look at this as a long term plan. and Intel's plan is shaky at best. The elephant in the room that Intel always had up it's sleeve was their "development funds:". The had to rearrange the program a while back to make it less obvious and provable that their marketing department used a lot of money to paper over their weak spots. Now, not only did they outsource marketing, they don't have the money to play that game anymore. The only thing keeping the OEM's in the business and laptop market with Intel is that AMD couldn't possibly make enough chips right now to cover the market, even if Intel folded outright.

AMD isn't going after server, workstation, and high end pc market by accident....that's where the money is.

 

[Achaios]

"Loosing" *is* a word. It just isn't the one this person intended to use.

No, it is not.

The word "SLACK" or "SLACKENED" is used to convey the notion of something being loosened.

The verb is to "slacken".

 

[jdm1983]

No, it is not.

The word "SLACK" or "SLACKENED" is used to convey the notion of something being loosened.

The verb is to "slacken".

Loosing is a word. It’s somewhat archaic and synonymous with releasing. One situation in which it’s still commonly used is archery. You loose, not fire, an arrow.

 

[sreams]

No, it is not.

The word "SLACK" or "SLACKENED" is used to convey the notion of something being loosened.

The verb is to "slacken".

Yes, it is. And it isn't used the same way as "slackened":

verb
gerund or present participle: loosing
set free; release.
"the hounds have been loosed"

 

[maxxcool7421]

I hope intel burns to the ground, taking the communist trump money with it ..

 

[Rudyduu]

I hope intel burns to the ground, taking the communist trump money with it ..

You think a CPU monopoly will be good for anyone, but the AMD and the US Government? Would you turn down billions in investment from the US government for your struggling business? It would have been stupid to refuse the money given the current administrations pettiness.

 

[hay fizzy]

With Google and Amazon, Facebook, Apple and now Microsoft building there own ArM processes they will take 20%of server market share.