Puget Systems survey shows that 9 out of 10 workstation users opted for Threadripper CPUs

midian182

Posts: 9,745   +121
Staff member
In brief: Custom PC builder Puget Systems has released its 2023 Hardware Trends survey, revealing what its orders looked like over the 12 months of last year. When it comes to client CPUs, Intel held a considerable lead over AMD, but Team Red dominated in the workstation. On the software side, the number of orders with Windows 11 increased as Windows 10 system sales declined.

As Puget's systems are aimed at high-end workflows for content creation, engineering, and scientific computing, its sales are weighted more toward workstations, though it still sells PCs with client processors, which it defines as AMD Ryzen and Intel Core CPUs.

Intel has been leading the client orders section since January 2022, and last year was no different. Team Blue's Intel Core i9 13900KS launched in the first quarter of 2023, while its 14th-gen series arrived in the final quarter, helping ensure Intel chips were found in about 80% of Puget's client CPU orders. AMD did launch the popular Ryzen 7900X3D/7950X3D in Q2, but it still only managed a 20% share. It'll be interesting to see what impact the recent Ryzen 8000 and upcoming Ryzen 9000 series have on this year's orders.

When it comes to workstation orders, it was AMD that dominated in 2023, with its Threadripper Pro making up the lion's share of sales. Despite the Threadripper 7000 series only arriving in December, it still managed to nearly reach the same combined order numbers as the Threadripper Pro 5000 and 7000. Intel's Xeon chips, meanwhile, were only in around 10% of orders.

Puget also looked at the OS side of things. Microsoft will be happy to learn that Windows 11 is now used in about 80% of Puget's systems, though around 10% of customers opted to downgrade to Windows 10, which is about the same percentage of people who choose Linux.

Windows 11 is used by around 42% of Steam survey participants, about 12% less than Windows 10. That's still better than the global view, where Windows 10 is found in about 7 out of 10 PCs.

Puget uses Nvidia GPUs in its systems almost exclusively, but it still offered a breakdown for its GeForce gaming and Professional (formerly Quadro) orders. GeForce made up about 80% of the systems in this category.

Finally, Puget compared SATA, NVMe, and Platter storage (primary drive) orders. Unsurprisingly, NVMe drives were in 95% of orders. The company writes that a handful of specialty accounts that specifically need SATA for one reason or another kept this from being 100%.

Permalink to story.

 
Makes me wonder how stupid those client customers really are.

But then I understood: Puget systems is based on America.

Edit: It seems that if you click "custom", they offer Intel on default. So probably nothing happens no matter what AMD do if they still keep recommending Intel on default.
 
Most "clients" buys a brand service, not a custom build or even prefered CPU line ...its all about availability and all package deals...
If those clients had the option to go AMD, they would ....
 
If Puget Portfolio for client base is mainly Intel offerings, then of course this result would happen.

Intel has always been good for making sure the competition don't get exposure with OEMs.
 
The thing is, for workstations, nobody want Xeon. They know they can't get away by selling Xeon workstation, so they have no choice to offer what the client really want.

Intel bribing and tactics have their limits.
 
Most "clients" buys a brand service, not a custom build or even prefered CPU line ...its all about availability and all package deals...
If those clients had the option to go AMD, they would ....

They have AMD systems available so that explanation is wrong.
 
'Clients CPU's'.
https://www.pugetsystems.com/configure/
What is the default selection for you there?
Noone is arguing about workstations, mind you.
Intel Core Z790 Mid Tower WiFi 6e Thunderbolt 4 18.7″ H x 9.4″ W x 21.5″ D
ASUS ProArt Z790-Creator WiFi (Intel Z790 ATX)
Intel Core i7 14700K

Etc.

If you read more carefully, workstation with Ryzen or Core is "client". Workstation with Threadripper or Xeon is "workstation".
 
These are productivity machines so E-cores pretty much explains the AMD to Intel shift in early 2022. Beforehand Intel was well behind and with Alder Lake, that all changed.
 
These are productivity machines so E-cores pretty much explains the AMD to Intel shift in early 2022. Beforehand Intel was well behind and with Alder Lake, that all changed.
You mean Intel would also lead on workstation CPUs if they had Crap-cores?

Intel is still miles behind and Crap-cores are simply waste for productivity (real world, not benchmarks). Not even mentioning difference in power consumption.
 
These are productivity machines so E-cores pretty much explains the AMD to Intel shift in early 2022. Beforehand Intel was well behind and with Alder Lake, that all changed.
ROFL... no...

If Puget is limiting client CPU with a majority of Intel offering then, of course, Intel CPUs are going to be favored in those numbers.
 
ROFL... no...

If Puget is limiting client CPU with a majority of Intel offering then, of course, Intel CPUs are going to be favored in those numbers.

Explain 2021 then:

2024-03-06-image-p.webp
 
Explain 2021 then:

2024-03-06-image-p.webp
What there is to explain? Intel got and lost share (should have been steady decline) on 2021 AND lost bit share just after Alder Lake had launched. Raptor Lake launch and Ryzen 7000 series 3D models launch also had pretty much zero effect.

Basically there is no CPU launch that actually had any effect on that graph.
 
What there is to explain? Intel got and lost share (should have been steady decline) on 2021 AND lost bit share just after Alder Lake had launched. Raptor Lake launch and Ryzen 7000 series 3D models launch also had pretty much zero effect.

Basically there is no CPU launch that actually had any effect on that graph.

Falling from 70% to 30% share in 4 months is not losing a "bit" of share. And vice versa for gaining 30% to 70%. That's huge.

Alder Lake launched in Nov. 2021, and the next data point later the huge gain started, already finishing a single data point later. With a dearth of other direct explanations and in an overall CPU market already biased towards Intel, Alder Lake's productivity improvements after years of stagnation are a pretty good reason to choose them and here it seems a lot of people did.
 
I think the question is how many client CPUs were sold by Puget here. As the article mentioned, the company specialises in Workstation class PCs. So yes, the number may have spiked for Intel client CPU, but in number of sales, it may not be that impressive. I do agree that Alder Lake did generate quite a fair bit of interest and sales for Intel, but it also comes at a cost to Intel because they had to price it very competitively. I don’t believe they could maintain their margins like back in the days. The other thing that could be driving higher Intel CPU sales is the fact that most PC companies don’t really offer AMD solutions readily or giving them some sort of handicap. To give an example, I was recently in the market for a work laptop and I went to check out Lenovo and Acer. Lenovo for some strange reason by default, do not select AMD solutions in their filters when I clicked on the sales tab. Hence I could not find any AMD based laptops, until I checked the filters and figured it’s not selected. And in a few cases, I also noticed that the AMD based laptops seems to be artificially dumbed down, ie, for no good reason and the same model have better specs than the AMD version. Things like display are limited to lower end solutions for AMD. The same spec limitation also applies to Acer and for no good reasons, you may also notice that most AMD laptops are limited to just 16GB of ram when it’s soldered. I sense some shady practice here. All these will clearly show impact consumer decision on getting a PC with AMD CPU.
 
Last edited:
Falling from 70% to 30% share in 4 months is not losing a "bit" of share. And vice versa for gaining 30% to 70%. That's huge.

Alder Lake launched in Nov. 2021, and the next data point later the huge gain started, already finishing a single data point later. With a dearth of other direct explanations and in an overall CPU market already biased towards Intel, Alder Lake's productivity improvements after years of stagnation are a pretty good reason to choose them and here it seems a lot of people did.

Change didn't show immediately.

Problem with your logic is fact that you can explain only One CPU launch. How about Zen3? Zen4? Zen3 3D? Zen4 3D? You see any impact on chart? There should be. But no.

So you are making assumptions based on single CPU launch and single data point on graph. It just doesn't work that way.

It may well be something like I already showed: by default custom system recommends Intel.

As for productivity "improvements", I saw how good Alder Lake really is on real life. Productivity work, something intensive running on virtual machine. Worker drags virtual machine windows and wiggle it around. "It calculates faster this way". Why? Because then Thread director keeps it on P-cores instead transferring it into Crap cores.

So anyone that says Alder lake is good for productivity is a ***** or have not actually tried it.
 
AMD and AM5 probably suffers because of expensive motherboards and chipset fragmentation + slow boot times and issues in general. 1st gen is mostly a mess for AMD. Same was true for Ryzen 1000 and 300 series chipsets.

Lets hope Zen 5 and chipset refreshes will fix this.

Intels cheaper 12400, 13400 series (and similar) took massive marketshare in OEM market. Cheap and decent chips with boards that are cheap as well. Can even be paired with DDR4 which has been dirt cheap too.

I can't wait for Arrow Lake vs Zen 5 this year. True next gen battle. AMD won't have node advantage this time.
 
Last edited:
I can't wait for Arrow Lake vs Zen 5 this year. True next gen battle. AMD won't have node advantage this time.

For desktop, Zen5 is better, no question about that. Arrow Lake is mostly for mobile.

So nothing to wait tbh.
 
Arrow Lake is desktop and mobile. Meteor Lake is mobile only.

Arrow Lake is desktop too just because Meteor Lake is mobile only. Tells more than enough. Arrow Lake desktop should not exist but because no Meteor Lake desktop, Intel has to do it.

Another panic solution just like E-cores.
 

They have AMD systems available so that explanation is wrong.

After seen a couple metrics in CPU/GPU benchmarks, its clear that Intel is not the best route, they have some "perks", but in the long run Ryzen are flatout the best option. Intel needs too much Power to get levels of Ryzen processing, and plus AMD cpu sockets are proven to provides upgrade options in the long run, something that Intel can't/will do. With current gen of Intel its even worse. Intel still has a lot of Laptop market share, but that is because AMD still havent broke the "Intel is best at laptops" mentality.
 
Arrow Lake is desktop too just because Meteor Lake is mobile only. Tells more than enough. Arrow Lake desktop should not exist but because no Meteor Lake desktop, Intel has to do it.

Another panic solution just like E-cores.
Yes Arrow Lake desktop should def exist.

And while I don't personally like E-cores, they seem to work great for some tasks, heavily improving multi threaded performance.

14900K -> "Faster in productivity than any other AMD CPU"


So the "panic solution" seems to work.

The only problem with Intel is watt usage, but Arrow Lake on TSMC 3nm should fix that. Intels performance is not a problem at all. Mostly they beat AMD here.

AMDs biggest problem right now, is they need 3D cache to deliver good gaming performance, but clockspeeds on 3D chips are gimped making them less than ideal for actual work. You can buy non-3D models then, and get gimped game performance. So with AMD you have to choose between work and gaming. With Intel you can get both.

The only truly good gaming chip AMD has right now is 7800X3D, all the other loses to Intel, but 7800X3D loses with a huge margin outside of gaming. 7950X3D is hit or miss without Process Lasso and 7900X3D is garbage because of 6+6 config. Many games also prefer high clockspeed over cache and runs better on Intel. Starfield for example. 7800X3D is beaten in several games.

This is probably why AMD is loosing marketshare in the client marked.

I hope AMD will be able to bump clockspeed on 3D chips next gen. My 5800X3D was gimped too.

I will gladly go back to Intel if Arrow Lake impress. Could not care less which brand I use.

Arrow Lake on 3nm TSMC could fix Intels watt usage.
 
Last edited:
Another big problem with AMDs Zen archtecture is IF keeps gimping performance on chips with more than 1 CCD.

This is why 7800X3D beats 7950X3D in gaming overall and 7700X beats 7950X in gaming as well.

A single CCD is just superior for gaming.

Which is why 7900X3D should never have existed. No wonder its priced about the same as 7800X3D at this point. 6 cores with 3D cache only is meh.
 
Yes Arrow Lake desktop should def exist.

And while I don't personally like E-cores, they seem to work great for some tasks, heavily improving multi threaded performance.

14900K -> "Faster in productivity than any other AMD CPU"


So the "panic solution" seems to work.
Again, that's just BS. That "faster productivity" only applies on situations where only one task is running foreground. At what situations that happens on real life? List is very short:

- Benchmarks

That's it. Remember, tech sites usually have very short time period when to make review. That's good excuse. However that also means their claim is total BS. As usual, I know these things better than TechpowerUp and Techspot combined. You can see Techspot's Alder Lake coverage here:


Now, Techspot's two articles do not mention one thing single time. TechpowerUp mentions it but testing is absent.

What I'm talking about here? AVX-512. As we know, Alder Lake do not support AVX-512 (because BIOS update disabled it) and Crap-cores do not have that capability anyway.

So how much performance we are talking about? You can check for example this one https://www.phoronix.com/review/zen4-avx512-7700x

There are many situations where performance almost doubled and some where performance increase is over 2x. Now, include AVX-512 benchmarks into mix and honestly, do you still consider Alder Lake faster on productivity?

Like I said, sites like Techspot and Techpowerup have no match for me.
The only problem with Intel is watt usage, but Arrow Lake on TSMC 3nm should fix that. Intels performance is not a problem at all. Mostly they beat AMD here.
Remember, Intel only manages to get good performance on high clock speeds. You assume Arrow Lake has high clocks but we'll see.
AMDs biggest problem right now, is they need 3D cache to deliver good gaming performance, but clockspeeds on 3D chips are gimped making them less than ideal for actual work. You can buy non-3D models then, and get gimped game performance. So with AMD you have to choose between work and gaming. With Intel you can get both.
Why should I? 3D-models are great for actual work, again. If you think you know something because you can look benchmark results, you are wrong.
The only truly good gaming chip AMD has right now is 7800X3D, all the other loses to Intel, but 7800X3D loses with a huge margin outside of gaming. 7950X3D is hit or miss without Process Lasso and 7900X3D is garbage because of 6+6 config. Many games also prefer high clockspeed over cache and runs better on Intel. Starfield for example. 7800X3D is beaten in several games.
Tell me why 7950X3D is "hit or miss" without Process Lasso? You can adjust how easily (cache affinity) threads use "cache" CCD and "without cache" CCD.

Alder Lake however is 100% useless without Process Lasso or similar. Previous virtual machine example tells everything.

Starfield is Bethesda crap, engine is decades old. About worst example you can give.
 
Again, that's just BS. That "faster productivity" only applies on situations where only one task is running foreground. At what situations that happens on real life? List is very short:

- Benchmarks

That's it. Remember, tech sites usually have very short time period when to make review. That's good excuse. However that also means their claim is total BS. As usual, I know these things better than TechpowerUp and Techspot combined. You can see Techspot's Alder Lake coverage here:


Now, Techspot's two articles do not mention one thing single time. TechpowerUp mentions it but testing is absent.

What I'm talking about here? AVX-512. As we know, Alder Lake do not support AVX-512 (because BIOS update disabled it) and Crap-cores do not have that capability anyway.

So how much performance we are talking about? You can check for example this one https://www.phoronix.com/review/zen4-avx512-7700x

There are many situations where performance almost doubled and some where performance increase is over 2x. Now, include AVX-512 benchmarks into mix and honestly, do you still consider Alder Lake faster on productivity?

Like I said, sites like Techspot and Techpowerup have no match for me.

Remember, Intel only manages to get good performance on high clock speeds. You assume Arrow Lake has high clocks but we'll see.

Why should I? 3D-models are great for actual work, again. If you think you know something because you can look benchmark results, you are wrong.

Tell me why 7950X3D is "hit or miss" without Process Lasso? You can adjust how easily (cache affinity) threads use "cache" CCD and "without cache" CCD.

Alder Lake however is 100% useless without Process Lasso or similar. Previous virtual machine example tells everything.

Starfield is Bethesda crap, engine is decades old. About worst example you can give.
Sounds like reality hurt.

You talk crap about Intel, then go in full tears when I point AMDs issues out.

I will never understand fanboys.

Instead of hoping Arrow Lake will be great, you downright deny it will happen. Even tho it has been confirmed officially on several occations. Hahaha.
 
Back