Thursday, August 12th 2021

AMD Hits Highest CPU Market Share Since 2006, According to Mercury Research

AMD has hit its highest "PC processor" market share since 2006, according to the latest market analysis report by Mercury Research. The firm's PC processor metric only covers client-segment processors (excludes the strides AMD has made in the enterprise space with EPYC). According to the report, AMD now holds 16.9% of the market, its highest since 2006. This is a 0.8 percentage points increase sequentially, and 7.3 percentage points growth year-over-year.

When looking at the overall x86 processor market (which now includes enterprise chips), AMD holds 15.8 percent, which is a 0.7 percentage point sequential gain, and 4.1 percentage points gain YoY. AMD holds 11.6% of the server processor market. Market share only paints part of the picture. Guru3D notes that AMD is trading market share for margins, by reducing shipments of low-cost processors in favor of premium processors with higher margins.
Source: Guru3D
Add your own comment

17 Comments on AMD Hits Highest CPU Market Share Since 2006, According to Mercury Research

#1
AlwaysHope
So they should, make good products nowadays.
Posted on Reply
#2
eidairaman1
The Exiled Airman
AlwaysHopeSo they should, make good products nowadays.
Too bad they didnt stop the 1st phenom from launch. And then didnt hand design Bulldozer
Posted on Reply
#3
john_
eidairaman1Too bad they didnt stop the 1st phenom from launch. And then didnt hand design Bulldozer
Phenom was pretty good as a chip. Ruiz's stupidity to throw all company's resources in creating the first native quad core processor was the disaster. On the other hand, Intel used glue and that was the correct choice. The first Phenom was rushed and delayed at the same time, while it's true native quad core nature, didn't really offered any important gains to justify all the hype. Especially in an era where single thread was king, not because we have to push Intel in the top spot, but because the majority of software was single thread anyway.
Bulldozer, yes, it was a marketing failure. AMD's Pentium 4.
Posted on Reply
#4
R0H1T
Arguably the biggest self goal was the decision to stay (be?) a node behind Intel. They were chasing leather (sporting term) ever since, till Zen came along!
Posted on Reply
#5
Ferrum Master
You have to keep in mind, that AMD has poor presentability in laptop market.

Considering that, the real ratio how it has eaten the desktop/workstation/server market is very respectable.
Posted on Reply
#6
Fourstaff
Well done AMD. However, since 2006 ARM has come a long way, and I would go as far as to argue that it is now the predominant processor architecture. How AMD is going to transition from their current success in x86 will be a very interesting story in 2030 I think. I have no doubt that x86 will be a niche processor by then, the same way how POWER became niche.
Posted on Reply
#7
R0H1T
FourstaffI have no doubt that x86 will be a niche processor by then, the same way how POWER became niche.
Nope :shadedshu:
Posted on Reply
#8
ZoneDymo
RichardsIntel still dominates server and mobile market unquestioned leadership
you seem to be parroting Gelsinger but apart from that, that sentence is not even English...again...come on man

On the actual topic....great....now can they use this immense profit to maybe lower some (gpu) prices? ya know, bit like Epic giving back based on their tremendous succes?
Posted on Reply
#9
TheinsanegamerN
FourstaffWell done AMD. However, since 2006 ARM has come a long way, and I would go as far as to argue that it is now the predominant processor architecture. How AMD is going to transition from their current success in x86 will be a very interesting story in 2030 I think. I have no doubt that x86 will be a niche processor by then, the same way how POWER became niche.
2006 called and wants its prediction back LOL. We've been hearing for a decade now how ARM is going to "dominate" the market in 5-10 years time, and in that decade we've gotten the surface X, which ran non optimized apps slwoer then a celeron. Wow, such performance, much dominance. Apple's M1 and it's M1 successor were so amazing they used intel xeons in the new macbook pro lineup.

COULD ARM dominate? Absolutely? Will it? Well, every attempt to make a high power ARM design has either failed or has not lived up to expectations, and even if apple figures it out, that's apple, they're a blip on the radar outside of mobile devices. ARM is dominant in mobile, but has never made a succesful jump to desktop outside of tightly controlled enviroments, like apple macbooks or that new russian machine. Once I can buy a ARM processor and stick it in a desktop motherboard it might have a chance.
john_Phenom was pretty good as a chip. Ruiz's stupidity to throw all company's resources in creating the first native quad core processor was the disaster. On the other hand, Intel used glue and that was the correct choice. The first Phenom was rushed and delayed at the same time, while it's true native quad core nature, didn't really offered any important gains to justify all the hype. Especially in an era where single thread was king, not because we have to push Intel in the top spot, but because the majority of software was single thread anyway.
Bulldozer, yes, it was a marketing failure. AMD's Pentium 4.
Even ignoring the quad core push, the pehom I was still a failure. At the same clock speed it was slower then the first gen core 2 duo, and it couldnt clock as high to boot. To make matters worse, the second gen core 2 design with the larger cache came out the same year.
Posted on Reply
#10
Vayra86
Frighteningly low percentage, still, if you think of it. We're already at 5xxx

This goes to show you really need a long breath in your architecture and/or constant improvement. Intel failed doing that after a long time and started hurting for it. I hope AMD can keep this momentum and improvements in Zen.
Posted on Reply
#11
TheinsanegamerN
Vayra86Frighteningly low percentage, still, if you think of it. We're already at 5xxx

This goes to show you really need a long breath in your architecture and/or constant improvement. Intel failed doing that after a long time and started hurting for it. I hope AMD can keep this momentum and improvements in Zen.
It takes awhile for the market to move. On the desktop zen was worse for gaming until the current gen, even if the difference was nto that great with zen 3000 people were not going to dump a functional desktop just to get a new one. CPUs age like wine these days.

The server and professional market is well entrenched, AMD's software suite still pales compared to intels. As that changes we see adoption increase, in addition to the sheer performance differenc egrowing too big to ignore.

I hope intel starts getting more competitive again, the price hikes lately from AMD completely wipe out the value proposition from their new hardware.
Posted on Reply
#12
HenrySomeone
Vayra86Frighteningly low percentage, still, if you think of it. We're already at 5xxx

This goes to show you really need a long breath in your architecture and/or constant improvement.
Bingo! And this is where it gets hairy for AMD (and their many fanboys, or perhaps them even more so) - any head start they've head lately will be gone with Alder Lake and absolutely demolished with Meteor Lake (especially if the latter really does arrive before Zen4)
Posted on Reply
#13
Alien88
Always had intel-based PCs up until my last one, which I put together a while back with a 2400GE and couldn't be happier, does everything I need, no extra energy consumption of a unnecessary graphics card, vastly better graphics than the intel integrated graphics it replaced (or any current chip), unless something goes dramatically wrong with AMD, I won't be switching back.
Posted on Reply
#14
HenrySomeone
But do you actually use that "vastly better" graphic capabilities? It's still not enough for any recent games at any respectable settings and if you don't game at all, then Intel's integrated gpus (recent ones, obviously, not the one you had before) are just as good and in some use cases better.
Posted on Reply
#15
Melvis
HenrySomeoneBut do you actually use that "vastly better" graphic capabilities? It's still not enough for any recent games at any respectable settings and if you don't game at all, then Intel's integrated gpus (recent ones, obviously, not the one you had before) are just as good and in some use cases better.
Nope

Posted on Reply
#16
Vayra86
HenrySomeoneBingo! And this is where it gets hairy for AMD (and their many fanboys, or perhaps them even more so) - any head start they've head lately will be gone with Alder Lake and absolutely demolished with Meteor Lake (especially if the latter really does arrive before Zen4)
Weeell... lets see about that. Any post with fanboy in it loses a chunk of credibility to me. And then you even add 'demolished' for an even further away release. Clearly you havent paid attention.
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment
Jul 3rd, 2022 19:23 EDT change timezone

New Forum Posts

Popular Reviews

Controversial News Posts