AMD's desktop CPU share passes Intel's for first time in 15 years

[midian182]

What just happened? For the first time in fifteen years, AMD has overtaken Intel when it comes to global desktop CPU market share, according to PassMark. The news signifies another step in AMD closing the gap on what was once the undisputed leader in the consumer processor space.

Benchmarking giant PassMark Software’s latest results for Q1 2021 show AMD taking a 50.8 percent share of the worldwide desktop CPU market, leaving Intel with 49.2 percent. The last time team red went ahead was way back in in Q1 2006, though its 53.9 percent lead back then lasted only a single quarter.

Desktop CPU Market Share

Chipzilla still dominates in the laptop segment with an 83.8 percent share while AMD sits on 16.3 percent. The difference is even more pronounced in the server space: Intel has 98.6 percent, AMD just 1.4 percent.

Laptop CPU Market Share

However, looking at all CPUs, AMD’s new lead in desktop means the gap between it and Intel is the smallest (around 22.2 percent) it has been in the last 15 years.

AMD vs Intel Market Share (All CPUs)

PassMark notes that its data is made up of thousands of PerformanceTest benchmark (download here) results and, as its software only runs on Windows OS, the charts do not reflect non-Windows users.

We’ve seen AMD breathing down the neck of its rival since the launch of the Ryzen processors in 2017, with every generation of the architecture putting increasing pressure on former fan-favorite Intel. We love the 7nm Ryzen 5000 series—the only real problem is finding one.

Intel also has the added worry of 5nm Zen 4 arriving later this year. Its Rocket Lake processors, which use a variant of Sunny Cove backported to the 14nm process, are reportedly dropping in March.

Permalink to story.

https://www.techspot.com/news/88148-amd-desktop-cpu-share-passes-intel-first-time.html

 

[Lionvibez]

Well Done AMD this has been an uphill battle. And I'm not surprised at the server market share that is a much harder nut to crack. Those servers usually are tied to multi year support contracts. And companies don't just switch vendors even if one product is better than the other, its a lengthy process.

 

[punctualturn]

Awesome job, AMD!

Nvidia, you are next...

 

[ZackL04]

Awesome job, AMD!

Nvidia, you are next...

Im a betting man, and my money is still on Nvidia

 

[Nobina]

Awesome job, AMD!

Nvidia, you are next...

Once they get DLSS equivalent then that could be a competitive choice. Also, if they did a better job of with stock they would be destroying both Intel and Nvidia right now.

 

[JStacts]

While it is good to see them making progress, these data do not indicate a desktop market share lead. AMD really, truly, incredibly, desperately needs to get their products into corporate machines that are adopted by large offices. That is a very large and lucrative market that seems completely dominated by Intel.

There are hundreds of thousands (millions?) of office PCs that are never benchmarked (and therefore are never seen by sites like Passmark) but are used every day and represent millions if not billions in revenue to the manufacturer.

 

[bviktor]

Awesome job, AMD!

Nvidia, you are next...

The wishful thinking is strong with this one.

 

[HardReset]

Well Done AMD this has been an uphill battle. And I'm not surprised at the server market share that is a much harder nut to crack. Those servers usually are tied to multi year support contracts. And companies don't just switch vendors even if one product is better than the other, its a lengthy process.

While this sounds legit, it's not. Many companies like Apple, Microsoft and Amazon are actually developing own CPU's. And that's at least thousand times more complicated (and million times more expensive) process than switching Intel CPU to AMD CPU. Switching to AMD is not problem at all. Some morons just don't want to do that.

While it is good to see them making progress, these data do not indicate a desktop market share lead. AMD really, truly, incredibly, desperately needs to get their products into corporate machines that are adopted by large offices. That is a very large and lucrative market that seems completely dominated by Intel.

There are hundreds of thousands (millions?) of office PCs that are never benchmarked (and therefore are never seen by sites like Passmark) but are used every day and represent millions if not billions in revenue to the manufacturer.

Of course AMD knows this but AMD also knows that while desktop buyers are intelligent, server buyers are stupid and laptop buyers are *****s. That's why AMD first publishes desktop parts and lastly laptop parts.

When time goes by, server and laptop buyers get more intelligent and situation corrects.

 

[Achaios]

Chipzilla Delenda Est.

 

[JStacts]

Of course AMD knows this but AMD also knows that while desktop buyers are intelligent, server buyers are stupid and laptop buyers are *****s. That's why AMD first publishes desktop parts and lastly laptop parts.

When time goes by, server and laptop buyers get more intelligent and situation corrects.

Mostly, those markets are just slow to adjust. They are generally on a schedule for replacing old hardware and have the replacements lined up well before they are deployed (which is why a "new" office machine will be a year or two old by the time the box is opened for the first time).

 

[Eldritch]

Awesome job, AMD!

Nvidia, you are next...

Yeah, maybe after 4-5 years but impossible in short term due to refined DLSS and RTX implementations of Nvidia while AMD is just getting hang of them.

I suspect Nvidia may introduce some sort of AI enabled texture/shadow/effect etc downscaling in future which will accurately predict which part downscale won't be noticeable to human eyes. Just like MP3 killed Raw audio, DLSS and similar tech will become the default except for the nitpicky few. AMD has not introduced something as exciting and they are just catching up.

 

[HardReset]

Mostly, those markets are just slow to adjust. They are generally on a schedule for replacing old hardware and have the replacements lined up well before they are deployed (which is why a "new" office machine will be a year or two old by the time the box is opened for the first time).

They are slow to adjust because they don't actually care. When someone else pay bills, who cares?

Yeah, maybe after 4-5 years but impossible in short term due to refined DLSS and RTX implementations of Nvidia while AMD is just getting hang of them.

I suspect Nvidia may introduce some sort of AI enabled texture/shadow/effect etc downscaling in future which will accurately predict which part downscale won't be noticeable to human eyes. Just like MP3 killed Raw audio, DLSS and similar tech will become the default except for the nitpicky few. AMD has not introduced something as exciting and they are just catching up.

Very likely on short term actually. DirectML is coming and it may be much better than DLSS that is, strictly speaking, totally useless. Using high resolution monitor and then crapping image quality is just plain stupid. When it comes to ray tracing, all current solutions are just too slow. It doesn't matter if Nvidia or AMD is ahead because all current solutions are useless. And we have no idea about future solutions.

Human eye is much better than human ear when it comes to spotting differences. I highly suspect image quality crapping will become new norm because of that.

 

[Lionvibez]

Mostly, those markets are just slow to adjust. They are generally on a schedule for replacing old hardware and have the replacements lined up well before they are deployed (which is why a "new" office machine will be a year or two old by the time the box is opened for the first time).

Yup things don't change that quickly on a corporate cycle. And IT isn't just going to switch vendors overnight.

 

[HardReset]

Yup things don't change that quickly on a corporate cycle. And IT isn't just going to switch vendors overnight.

If it really is about money, they will switch overnight. But usually public sector just don't have to worry about nothing. There are endless amount of money coming anyway so why care? On private companies things are totally different. I have experience and have seen it myself.

 

[Lionvibez]

If it really is about money, they will switch overnight. But usually public sector just don't have to worry about nothing. There are endless amount of money coming anyway so why care? On private companies things are totally different. I have experience and have seen it myself.

I'm speaking mostly of the private sector I don't have much experience in public sector, thought I can ask a friend who is there now.

 

[hahahanoobs]

Less than 2% server?
Ms. Su claimed AMD would have 10% by end of 2020.

16% laptop means no gains since Renoir?

But 50% CPU on desktop?

Sounds fishy.

 

[Lionvibez]

Less than 2% server?
Ms. Su claimed AMD would have 10% by end of 2020.

16% laptop means no gains since Renoir?

But 50% CPU on desktop?

Sounds fishy.

50% with passmark numbers which only covers the Windows OS.

Will have to look elsewhere for data that covers other OS's

 

[Irata]

Mostly, those markets are just slow to adjust. They are generally on a schedule for replacing old hardware and have the replacements lined up well before they are deployed (which is why a "new" office machine will be a year or two old by the time the box is opened for the first time).

From my experience, large corporations usually do not decide on a CPU but most often on an OEM. It's basically "we need two/ three tiers of laptops, make an offer including a service plan".

 

[Lionvibez]

From my experience, large corporations usually do not decide on a CPU but most often on an OEM. It's basically "we need two/ three tiers of laptops, make an offer including a service plan".

Yup the discounts on these plans is what usually keeps the customers locked in. Switching may not get you the same discounts we know how intel likes to roll. And the IT manager will have to explain to senior management why cost will go up before they sign off on that purchase.

 

[HardReset]

From my experience, large corporations usually do not decide on a CPU but most often on an OEM. It's basically "we need two/ three tiers of laptops, make an offer including a service plan".

Of course, but that really doesn't change anything. Now, corporation buys from OEM, it SHOULD go like this:

- "We want AMD CPU"
- "Sorry, we don't have and have no plans to get"
- "We go buy elsewhere then".

But it usually goes like this:

- "We want AMD CPU"
- "Sorry, we don't have and have no plans to get. We can only offer Intel."
- "Well, I just don't give a (peep), we buy Intel then, not my money"

Yup the discounts on these plans is what usually keeps the customers locked in. Switching may not get you the same discounts we know how intel likes to roll. And the IT manager will have to explain to senior management why cost will go up before they sign off on that purchase.

Like I have been saying, on public sector price doesn't matter at all. When it comes to discounts, there are quite lot problems. First, OEM's have been complaining about Intel high pricing for ages. If Intel offer discounts to OEM's, why OEM's complain about high prices? Or do Intel give discounts directly to those who purchase from OEM? I doubt that.

Same thing about server market. Server buyers complain about Intel high prices but if they get discount AND still complain, then Intel prices even with discount are much higher than AMD prices. Otherwise there is nothing to complain actually.

So that discount theory just don't add up. It's just old morons buy Intel because Intel was good on 1991.

 

[Lionvibez]

Of course, but that really doesn't change anything. Now, corporation buys from OEM, it SHOULD go like this:

- "We want AMD CPU"
- "Sorry, we don't have and have no plans to get"
- "We go buy elsewhere then".

But it usually goes like this:

- "We want AMD CPU"
- "Sorry, we don't have and have no plans to get. We can only offer Intel."
- "Well, I just don't give a (peep), we buy Intel then, not my money"



Like I have been saying, on public sector price doesn't matter at all. When it comes to discounts, there are quite lot problems. First, OEM's have been complaining about Intel high pricing for ages. If Intel offer discounts to OEM's, why OEM's complain about high prices? Or do Intel give discounts directly to those who purchase from OEM? I doubt that.

Same thing about server market. Server buyers complain about Intel high prices but if they get discount AND still complain, then Intel prices even with discount are much higher than AMD prices. Otherwise there is nothing to complain actually.

So that discount theory just don't add up. It's just old morons buy Intel because Intel was good on 1991.

I just spoke to a friend who works in IT he is a Enterprise Architect at the public school board. Where there is 46,000+ staff. He said they don't even do hardware refresh cycles anymore since alot of stuff is in VM's these days. For them they replace hardware when it no longer works.

 

[HardReset]

I just spoke to a friend who works in IT he is a Enterprise Architect at the public school board. Where there is 46,000+ staff. He said they don't even do hardware refresh cycles anymore since alot of stuff is in VM's these days. For them they replace hardware when it no longer works.

Sounds like they have tons of thin clients or similar.

However, more important question is: AMD, Intel or something else. And why.

 

[christiangeli]

That is pass mark benchmark statistic, nothing near the real global pc sales ..

 

[OortCloud]

That is pass mark benchmark statistic, nothing near the real global pc sales ..

Absolutely - raw numbers of Intel desktop parts will massively exceed AMD parts still, this is significant only in that it shows what huge strides AMD has made.
Nobody however is running benchmarks on the millions of dreary Intel workstations sat in their dreary office cubicles. Also no non-enthusiast who goes to their local PC supermarket and buys something etc etc etc
This will only show us that enthusiast PC buyers who bought a desktop this year and who like to see what a good choice they made are very slightly more likely to have bought an AMD chip. Given that AMD chips are clearly the best choice at the moment I'm surprised its not a larger swing.

 

[brucek]

Surely there is a more reputable measure of CPU market share than "PassMark benchmarks run." Kudos to the PassMark PR manager who duped Techspot in running their press release, and shame on the TechSpot reporter who couldn't be bothered to call any legit data source to find actual reported data for two large public companies. Just for fun, should we guess what percentage of newly sold CPUs run a PassMark benchmark? I'm going to guess something well, well under 10%?

(This isn't any comment on AMD vs. Intel. AMD has recently passed Intel in being the "CPU I most want to buy", which is the metric I personally care about most.)