Intel grabs CPU market share back from AMD for first time in 3 years

NeoMorpheus

Posts: 651   +1,204
It's mcuh better to hold intel as guilty of orginal sin, beyond redemption, written off forever, and blindly buy AMD forever, because THATS how you build a healthy market.

Personally, if I could, yes. I do really hate them that much.

But that said, Intel exploited the market for over 10 years, we were stuck in 4 core hell, with minimal performance improvement and raped in any way they wanted (you want 8 cores? bend over and give me US$1k).

But now that AMD is giving us some respite, suddenly, all sites and rabid fanbois are crying to have Intel back on top.

And before you blame me of being an AMD rabid fanboi, I dont care who is on top, as far as is not Nvidia nor Intel.

The illegal and anticonsumer crap pulled by them has actually affected me as a paying customer, so I have no sympathy for them.

When AMD gets to that point, then they can also die.
 
Last edited:

NeoMorpheus

Posts: 651   +1,204
So, your argument is that you will buy from a company that is raising prices nowadays because it's competitor kept prices stagnant for years, before slashing them. Doesn't make much sense.
I already know what Intel will do when they are on top.

That definite does makes sense to me.

AMD raised prices? yes, they are also using cutting edge tech that someone has to pay for and yes, the 5600x is simply too much, its still a lot faster than anything offered by intel on the same bracket.

And if you think that the reason AMD didnt offered any competition, you should look at all the illegal crap that Intel did for AMD to end there.
 

BSim500

Posts: 810   +1,802
Who in their right mind would consider a intel when they can buy ryzen
In the UK, an i5-10400F (6C/12T) costs £128, an i7-10700F (8C/16T) costs £241 and a Ryzen 5600X (6C/12T) costs £300. On top of that, AMD motherboards of the same brand & model are also £40 or so more expensive (eg, £149 B550 vs £105 B460 both for MSI Mortar WiFi). And that's "best case" as in "In stock". Who in their right mind wouldn't look beyond "Underdog fanboyism" right now and buy what's both best value and actually available to buy with that disparity...
 
Last edited:

Adi6293

Posts: 823   +1,109
I have to ask but why did you switch?

Also, I think you're forgetting you now have zero upgrade path, you lost PCI-E4.0 capabilities, seems like a weird switch to make.

I had a buyer for my X470 motherboard, the 5800X, my 32GB of ram an aio I was no longer using and one of my spare 1TB SSD's for £950, I added £80 to that and got brand new Z490 motherboard, the 10850K, faster 32GB of ram and a EKWB CPU block.

I never had PCI 4.0 anyway and when will I need more that 10 Cores?


This video made me kind of want to switch just for sports, if the gaming performance is within 5% vs the 5900X then I think 10850K its a betting buy than 5800X at the same price and in UK at the time of buying the i9 was cheaper!! Plus I got to keep the Far Cry 6 I got with the Ryzen win - win ; - )
 

Adi6293

Posts: 823   +1,109
I was able to find a 5800X for $650 CAD. I had to watch the computer store close to my place like a hawk for a couple days because they kept playing with the price. When I first looked it was $800. When they dropped price I went in and grabbed the last one in store. By the following day the price was up to $669.

I then sold my 3800X for $400 so cost to upgrade was $250. Anyone placing orders and waiting for shipping well good luck.



What are your temps and what AIO are you using. I'm on a Corsair H150i Pro and in Aida 64 when I run the stress tess with AVX on max temp for me is around 77c.

From Anandtech the 10850K uses alot more power. And based on their review they are about equal in MT so those 2 extra cores doesn't provide much benefit over the 5800X

View attachment 87422

Full review here.

And yes the focus of the review is the 10700 but it has both processors dicussed here and its recent so I choose this instead of linking a 3 month old review.

This might be a stupid question but how do turn the AVX to max on Aida 64? Just so I can check and tell you, I'm using a Deepcool Castle RGB V2 360mm atm but will soon be doing a custom loop with 2 or 3 x 360mm rads 😅 😅
 

Theinsanegamer

Posts: 2,507   +3,768
Personally, if I could, yes. I do really hate them that much.

But that said, Intel exploited the market for over 10 years, we were stuck in 4 core hell, with minimal performance improvement and raped in any way they wanted (you want 8 cores? bend over and give me US$1k).

But now that AMD is giving us some respite, suddenly, all sites and rabid fanbois are crying to have Intel back on top.

And before you blame me of being an AMD rabid fanboi, I dont care who is on top, as far as is not Nvidia nor Intel.

The illegal and anticonsumer crap pulled by them has actually affected me as a paying customer, so I have no sympathy for them.

When AMD gets to that point, then they can also die.
"I dont care who is on top"

"yes I hate them that much"

HMMMMM..... methinks that is what we call a "contradiction".

Claiming intel held the market "hostage" with quad cores? Really? Those 8 cores were ridiculously expensive to build on 45/32/22nm nodes, and they often performed worse, regardless of tuning, then quad cores in games and consumer applications. 8 thread CPUs have existed in consumer hands since 2009, and consumer software really didnt start to take advantage in any noticeable way until 2018ish. Hell, game consoles have had 6 threads since 2005. That is not intel's fault. And as recent retesting by sites like techspot and gamers nexus shows, there were noticeable improvements, sure it wasnt 15% every year, but compare a sandy bridge or ivy bridge chip to kaby lake and tell me there's been no improvement.

Also, the quad cores were not "illegal". The last time intel pulled something illegal was during the netburst era. The kids born in those years can drive now! Many of the people in leadership positions at that time are no longer with the company. Let. It. Go. They were found guilty, they paid the fine, and hell, even their bribes lasted all of, what, 2 years judging by the number of athlon 64 prebuilts existed? What really killed off the 64 lines in OEMs in later years was AMD's inability to consistently supply chips to the likes of dell and HP, which is why they tried the disasterous glofo project.

And you weren't stuck in quad core hell. AMD made the phenom II x6, it was cheaper then an i5, and hey, it had no wasteful iGPU either! Huzza! Then AMD gave you not 1 but 2 generations with 8 cores and tons of cache and 40 PCIe lanes!
 
Last edited:

Lionvibez

Posts: 2,340   +1,874
This might be a stupid question but how do turn the AVX to max on Aida 64? Just so I can check and tell you, I'm using a Deepcool Castle RGB V2 360mm atm but will soon be doing a custom loop with 2 or 3 x 360mm rads 😅 😅

Just go into the preferences menu there is no Max setting only on and off once you check the boxes.

Adia settings.png
 

Adi6293

Posts: 823   +1,109
Just go into the preferences menu there is no Max setting only on and off once you check the boxes.

View attachment 87423

Ok so my max temperature was 87 but on average was around 80C. What voltage and motherboard are you using? I'm still getting to know the motherboard, its an ASUS ROG Strix Z490-E, currently my voltage is a 1.394v
 

Burty117

Posts: 4,128   +2,109
PCIe 4.0 is useless for GPUs right now, and the speed differenc ebetween a samsung 950 pro and a 980 pro for things like loading games is non existent. And the irony of calling LGA1200 a zero upgrade path socket, when rocket lake with PCIe 4.0 is coming, while praising the opposite for the 5800x, which is on socket AM4, which is at the end of life and will be replaced with socket AM5 for the next generation, just......cmon man, think a little bit here.
I don't even know where to begin, you didn't wait for them to respond, they had an X470 motherboard which explains why they don't care for PCI-E 4.0 but even if they did, why would you get rid of a feature to wait for Intel to do it? And use far more power in the process?

On top of that, Rocket Lake has LESS cores, not more, they may very well be stronger cores, but still, less cores? That's not an upgrade path...

Either way, his response made sense, yours was just classic Intel fanboy fluff I've come to expect from you 😉

Edit: For clarity, the X470 would still have a better upgrade path in the future because you could chuck a 5950X in there and get 16 cores.
 
Last edited:

Lionvibez

Posts: 2,340   +1,874
Ok so my max temperature was 87 but on average was around 80C. What voltage and motherboard are you using? I'm still getting to know the motherboard, its an ASUS ROG Strix Z490-E, currently my voltage is a 1.394v

Asus Prime X570 Pro

And using default voltage.
 

Avro Arrow

Posts: 1,461   +1,642
TechSpot Elite
"AMD’s decline is being blamed on the stock issues faced by its Ryzen 5000 processors."

I think that this is the long and short of it. You can't sell what isn't there. This can't be a surprise to AMD because it's pretty obvious that their 5000-series stock levels were going to be much lower than their previous 3000-series stock levels and those sold like mad. People are getting Intel CPUs primarily because they have no other options as even the 3000-series CPU supplies have all dried up.
 

Avro Arrow

Posts: 1,461   +1,642
TechSpot Elite
I recently switched to the 10850K from a 5800X, despite Intels massive power draw vs the Ryzen CPU my temperatures are much lower on a 360mm aio I'm using atm and gaming performance is basically on pair at 1440p plus I get extra 2 cores : -)
I would say that because of Intel's massive power draw vs. AMD you're getting lower temperatures, not despite them. :laughing:
I guess everyone already forgot and has forgiven Intel for all their anticonsumer and anti-competitive crap they have pulled on us and the industry.

There is no hope.
I can guarantee you that I'm not one of those people. I may never buy another Intel processor for as long as I live. I even stuck with my FX-8350 for five years and was fine with it despite Intel CPUs having better performance and power use the whole time. It's not like I suffered because my FX-8350 did all that I wanted it to and it was fine.

Meanwhile, people were blowing their money on Intel CPUs because they all had this stupid idea that they were somehow professional gamers with high-refresh displays. The upgrades were a joke because they were just re-hashed Sandy Bridge (and possibly still are) CPUs. Meanwhile, nobody really knows just how far behind we are in computer tech because of Intel's sandbagging but I guess that it's at least five years.

Intel can go pound salt as far as I'm concerned.
That hardware addiction must be fed. It's a biotch when you are jonesing for a hardware fix. :rolleyes: 🤣 I guess that this just shows that people will do anything for their hardware fix. :laughing:
The most dangerous thing about that is it shows just how little self-control people have and how much that they're willing to buy into a corporations lies and marketing just to get a few more fps that they'd never notice anyway.
I cannot say I agree. Who is now commanding the price premiums for their CPUs? From my viewpoint, its AMD especially with Threadripper CPUs. I doubt parity will ever be reached. Sooner or later, Intel will come out, once again, with a CPU superior to AMDs, and Intel will command the premium price. However, I think it is great to have them duking it out as it keeps the market fresh.
You're comparing apples and oranges when you talk about Threadripper. That's a pro-level workstation-class CPU that, when used as intended, pays for itself rather rapidly. Pro-level parts always have a price premium in any industry because they're designed to make you money in the professional arena. Threadripper is essentially unopposed because Intel has nothing to compete with it. Intel has only two lines, Core and Xeon while AMD has three lines, Ryzen, Threadripper and EPYC.

Intel Core -> AMD Ryzen
No Intel Product -> AMD Threadripper
Intel Xeon -> AMD EPYC

If you want to talk about unwarranted price premiums, you should talk about just how overpriced and underpowered the Intel Xeon line is when compared to AMD's EPYC line. The 26-core Intel Xeon 8170 with 6-channels of DDR4 and 48 PCI-Express lanes costs $12,863 while the 64-core AMD EPYC 7742 with 8 channels of DDR4 and 128 PCI-Express lanes costs only $7,445. Even if I didn't already hate the Intel Corporation, I know that for sure I wouldn't be buying the Xeon over the EPYC, even if the prices were the same. Which one would you choose?

Back in September of 2019, TweakTown did a test comparing two EPYC 7742 CPUs costing $13,900 and four Intel Xeon 8180M CPUs costing $52,000.
2 x AMD EPYC 7742 for $13,900 annihilate $52,000 worth of Intel Xeons
Now, is there a reason on Earth (other than abject stupidity) than anyone would choose those Xeons over those EPYCs? I can't think of a single one because the price disparity is so massive that you could probably buy an dual-socket SP3 (EPYC) motherboard, max out the RAM and it would still cost less than the two Xeons alone.

So at the pro-level (which outsells consumer-grade by a significant margin), Intel's CPUs are currently inferior but they're still trying to command a premium for them. I don't know if that's arrogance about themselves, a complete denial of reality or cynicism about their customers' intellectual capacities.
 
Last edited:

Loadedaxe

Posts: 48   +73
I guess everyone already forgot and has forgiven Intel for all their anticonsumer and anti-competitive crap they have pulled on us and the industry.

There is no hope.

Nvidia pulled some shady crap over the last few years yet everyone forgave them and are now drooling over RTX 3000, so much so they are willing to pay double for one. so yeah...no one cares what they do, in the end, they need a PC, and willing to forget and pay handsomely for it.
 

NeoMorpheus

Posts: 651   +1,204
I can guarantee you that I'm not one of those people. I may never buy another Intel processor for as long as I live. I even stuck with my FX-8350 for five years and was fine with it despite Intel CPUs having better performance and power use the whole time. It's not like I suffered because my FX-8350 did all that I wanted it to and it was fine.

Meanwhile, people were blowing their money on Intel CPUs because they all had this stupid idea that they were somehow professional gamers with high-refresh displays. The upgrades were a joke because they were just re-hashed Sandy Bridge (and possibly still are) CPUs. Meanwhile, nobody really knows just how far behind we are in computer tech because of Intel's sandbagging but I guess that it's at least five years.

Intel can go pound salt as far as I'm concerned.


I wish that I could upvote this more than once!
 

MaxSmarties

Posts: 501   +294
Say thank you to Lisa Su and her new price policy... she was able to make Intel CPUs more affordable than Ryzen.
And before anyone start thinking about an "Intel fanboy", in my PC there is an (overpriced) 5800X and in my son's PC there is a Ryzen 3600X.
 
Last edited:

MaxSmarties

Posts: 501   +294
"AMD’s decline is being blamed on the stock issues faced by its Ryzen 5000 processors."

I think that this is the long and short of it. You can't sell what isn't there. This can't be a surprise to AMD because it's pretty obvious that their 5000-series stock levels were going to be much lower than their previous 3000-series stock levels and those sold like mad. People are getting Intel CPUs primarily because they have no other options as even the 3000-series CPU supplies have all dried up.
Ryzen sales were good because they were cheaper than Intel's counterpart.
Now they are even more expensive.
This is the main reason.
People are getting Intel CPUs because you can buy a 10400F for less, much less than a 5600X, and even for less than a 3600X.
 

Lionvibez

Posts: 2,340   +1,874
Say thank you to Lisa Su and her new price policy... she was able to make Intel CPUs more affordable than Ryzen.
And before anyone start thinking about an "Intel fanboy", in my PC there is an (overpriced) 5800X and in my son's PC there is a Ryzen 3600X.

lol her new price policy. AMD only sets the MSRP the retailer does the rest I stopped reading the rest of your post after that. Retailers will follow market demand and price accordingly because they want to make a profit also.
 

Mr Majestyk

Posts: 766   +649
"AMD’s decline is being blamed on the stock issues faced by its Ryzen 5000 processors."

I think that this is the long and short of it. You can't sell what isn't there. This can't be a surprise to AMD because it's pretty obvious that their 5000-series stock levels were going to be much lower than their previous 3000-series stock levels and those sold like mad. People are getting Intel CPUs primarily because they have no other options as even the 3000-series CPU supplies have all dried up.

Really, 3000 series CPU's are easily obtained in Australia, everyone has stock and 5800X is readily obtained. What you cannot get other than a few at astronomical prices are AMD GPU's even 5700XT's. Prices are about 50-70% above RRP even when a few become available. It's worse than the bad situation for Nvidia GPU's.

I gave up on a current gen GPU and got a great deal on an as new 2080 Super for half new price. I had given up on a Zen 3 but I can buy a 5800X although it's a lot dearer than the 3700X, but I keep these systems for at least 5 years before upgrading so an extra $200 won't make much difference.
 

MaxSmarties

Posts: 501   +294
lol her new price policy. AMD only sets the MSRP the retailer does the rest I stopped reading the rest of your post after that. Retailers will follow market demand and price accordingly because they want to make a profit also.
I don’t care if you read or not.
MSRP prices are wrong since the beginning, especially for 5600X and 5800X
 

MaxSmarties

Posts: 501   +294
This is the problem arguing with AMD supporters: they are in denial mode.
I’m writing this from a 5800X, while my son is doing his homeworks on his PC with a 3600X. I’m a better AMD customer than most of them, but I can still see clear. AMD with its price policy and stock shortage is the main reason Comet Lake returned to be a good option after a slow start.
In the right conditions they are not different from Intel, on a marketing point of view.
 

Shadowboxer

Posts: 1,535   +1,116
I guess everyone already forgot and has forgiven Intel for all their anticonsumer and anti-competitive crap they have pulled on us and the industry.

There is no hope.

Lmao! AMD and Intel are just as bad as each other.

Only fanboys think otherwise.

I remember Intels “anti-competitive” decade of quad cores. For some reason people blame Intel for AMD basically abandoning the market. And at least back then the max price for a consumer grade cpu was like $300. Now it’s like $850 lol.

Oh and remember the class action against AMD for marketing their FX cores for having twice as many cores as they actually have? Yeah that’s far more recent than Intel’s lawsuits, most of which were so long ago that George Bush was still a new president.

Oh and before you do the usual shill move and accuse me, I have purchased a 5800X last month, it’s outstanding, I’m very happy with it. However my purchase was not even slightly influenced about some lawsuits Intel went through in the early 2000s when I was a teenager.
 
Last edited:

Shadowboxer

Posts: 1,535   +1,116
So many people I know have built PCs at the moment. I guess that’s the effect of a pandemic.

Actually most of them have bought pre-built as there is no standalone graphics card market right now. And almost all of them have ended up with either a 10600K or a 10700K. Both of which are readily available and a lot cheaper than Ryzen 5000. In fact you can get a 10700K for £330, only £30 more than a 5600X!

AMD made market share by being cheaper whilst Intel had shortages and higher prices. The situation is the opposite way round right now. AMD are facing shortages and raising prices.
 

MaxSmarties

Posts: 501   +294
So many people I know have built PCs at the moment. I guess that’s the effect of a pandemic.

Actually most of them have bought pre-built as there is no standalone graphics card market right now. And almost all of them have ended up with either a 10600K or a 10700K. Both of which are readily available and a lot cheaper than Ryzen 5000. In fact you can get a 10700K for £330, only £30 more than a 5600X!

AMD made market share by being cheaper whilst Intel had shortages and higher prices. The situation is the opposite way round right now. AMD are facing shortages and raising prices.
This.
Or on another example for people asking advices about buying a cheap gaming rig, I used to suggest a 3600, but today the 5600X is proposed at a crazy price for a 6C, the 3600 is hard to find and overpriced too, so the 10400F is a better option for them, and it is widely available.