Friday, May 13th 2022

AMD Pushes Highest x86 Market Share in History in 1Q2022

AMD has been on a roll ever since it launched its first generation Zen core, which brought a much-needed performance and efficiency boost that finally brought a level of competitiveness against Intel's offerings. Years of iterations and design improvements have only increased AMD's value proposition towards consumers and businesses. A testament to that fact is that AMD in Q1 2022 hit its largest market share in history.

According to market analysis firm Mercury Research, AMD's offerings have continued to claw back market share from Intel, despite its strong recovery in performance and efficiency metrics following the debut of the 12th Gen Intel CPU family, Alder Lake. The firm places AMD's overall x86 market share for 1Q 2022 (including IoT and SoCs such as the ones found in the latest gaming consoles) at a record-breaking 27.7%, up 2.1% QoQ and a staggering 7% YoY. The server side of the equation has seen less stellar gains, but still increased by 0.9% QoQ, and 2.7% YoY, achieving a high of 11.6% share against Intel's decades-long market stranglehold.
AMD's desktop CPU share did take a small hit compared to last year, according to the publication. Likely caused by Intel's market and technological resurgence with Alder Lake, AMD still achieved a 2.1% market share increase QoQ, placing it within 1% of its 1Q2021 high of 19.3% market share. Mobile has seen the seocnd largest increase in AMD's market share, with the company achieving a 0.9% increase QoQ (up to 22.5% share) and a significant 4.4% increase YoY.
Sources: via TechSpot, Mercury Research
Add your own comment

50 Comments on AMD Pushes Highest x86 Market Share in History in 1Q2022

#1
Chrispy_
OK, I was expecting a small regression for AMD marketshare on desktop because of non-K Alder Lake and cheaper B660 motherboards.

I guess it's all still relative and once you factor in motherboard, CPU, and cooler Alder Lake is still worse peformance/$ at almost every price point.
Posted on Reply
#2
ARF
Well, I read that Raptor Lake will have higher IPC, higher clocks and more cores than the Zen 4 Raphael.
Raptor Lake: 24 cores (8 P and 16 E) / 32 threads;
Raphael: 16 cores (16 P) / 32 threads.

People even say that Zen 5 will be the last Zen because it is already an outdated micro-architecture, and AMD will eventually license ARM cores for Apple chiplets...
Posted on Reply
#3
Tigger
I'm the only one
72% is still a hell of a market share to have. Well done AMD but they still have a double everest mountain to climb. Intel would have to make a major fuck up to lose that market share. I thought AMD would have gobbled into Intel's server share though with their threadrippers. Maybe a lot of business users just don't like to change or it would be a major headache moving from Intel to AMD.

Whatever the perf/$ is, i don't regret picking ADL. It never cost me anything and at the time ADL seemed like a pretty good performing setup. I am not adverse to switching to Zen 5 though, but probably not going to be a beta tester like i did with ADL though even though i have had zero problems with ADL
Posted on Reply
#4
john_
Chrispy_OK, I was expecting a small regression for AMD marketshare on desktop because of non-K Alder Lake and cheaper B660 motherboards.

I guess it's all still relative and once you factor in motherboard, CPU, and cooler Alder Lake is still worse peformance/$ at almost every price point.
Probably Alder Lake based offerings in laptops and desktops from OEMs are (much) more expensive than Ryzen based offerings, making it difficult for the majority of consumers to prefer those. Also Ryzen brand is still strong and most consumers probably don't have a clue about what exactly Alder Lake is. Also what we all probably understood when Ryzen came out is that the DIY market is a single digit part of the whole market, so even if all individuals building their own PCs where going to Alder Lake, the change in market share wouldn't have been as big as probably expected.
Posted on Reply
#5
chrcoluk
Tigger72% is still a hell of a market share to have. Well done AMD but they still have a double everest mountain to climb. Intel would have to make a major fuck up to lose that market share. I thought AMD would have gobbled into Intel's server share though with their threadrippers. Maybe a lot of business users just don't like to change or it would be a major headache moving from Intel to AMD.

Whatever the perf/$ is, i don't regret picking ADL. It never cost me anything and at the time ADL seemed like a pretty good performing setup. I am not adverse to switching to Zen 5 though, but probably not going to be a beta tester like i did with ADL though even though i have had zero problems with ADL
In the server space there is extra hurdles for AMD, such as support on BSD and linux kernels and support on enterprise software. I know e.g. when I was using my 2600X on ESXI the chip was been gimped quite significantly after I seen a large boost moving to proxmox. In addition early version of AGESA had poor support for enterprise type features.
Posted on Reply
#6
Tigger
I'm the only one
chrcolukIn the server space there is extra hurdles for AMD, such as support on BSD and linux kernels and support on enterprise software. I know e.g. when I was using my 2600X on ESXI the chip was been chipped quite significantly after I seen a large boost moving to proxmox. In addition early version of AGESA had poor support for enterprise type features.
Server side is probably where Intel make most money too
Posted on Reply
#7
ARF
TiggerI thought AMD would have gobbled into Intel's server share though with their threadrippers.
No, Threadripper is a workstation class CPU, for the servers AMD has a different line called EPYC.
Posted on Reply
#8
DeathtoGnomes
TiggerMaybe a lot of business users just don't like to change or it would be a major headache moving from Intel to AMD
IF its not broke, dont fix it. Its more likely businesses that might switch over, will wait until their current servers are EOL or blown up dead. That speaks to Intel reliability even if it does cost more to keep them running.
Posted on Reply
#9
ARF
DeathtoGnomesIF its not broke, dont fix it. Its more likely businesses that might switch over, will wait until their current servers are EOL or blown up dead. That speaks to Intel reliability even if it does cost more to keep them running.
The truth is that AMD is screwed because these customers refuse to switch over to AMD's line because of TCO, and that the CPU is only one element in the whole ecosystem. And these corrupted customers are well paid in this ecosystem, and technically locked in it. Or in other words - they say there is no alternative for them.
Posted on Reply
#10
DeathtoGnomes
ARFThe truth is that AMD is screwed because these customers refuse to switch over to AMD's line because of TCO, and that the CPU is only one element in the whole ecosystem. And these corrupted customers are well paid in this ecosystem, and technically locked in it. Or in other words - they say there is no alternative for them.
Yea I can see that. I recall Intel having made long term contracts that 'assisted' in that lock.

Its interesting you call them corrupt customers, so they're in the Fanboi category?:D
Posted on Reply
#11
ARF
DeathtoGnomesYea I can see that. I recall Intel having made long term contracts that 'assisted' in that lock.

Its interesting you call them corrupt customers, so they're in the Fanboi category?:D
Corrupt means they take money illegally, under the table, without proper competitions in order to choose who will supply them. It is like everything is decided in advance and AMD has no chance no matter how great products it has...
Posted on Reply
#12
DeathtoGnomes
ARFCorrupt means they take money illegally, under the table, without proper competitions in order to choose who will supply them. It is like everything is decided in advance and AMD has no chance no matter how great products it has...
Yea, and thats why many IT departments seem to always disagree with Corporate management.
Posted on Reply
#13
Chrispy_
DeathtoGnomesYea, and thats why many IT departments seem to always disagree with Corporate management.
Don't forget consultant kickbacks and exclusive partner bonuses.
All that disgusts me, as an enterprise customer.
Posted on Reply
#14
jardows
Tigger72% is still a hell of a market share to have. Well done AMD but they still have a double everest mountain to climb. Intel would have to make a major fuck up to lose that market share. I thought AMD would have gobbled into Intel's server share though with their threadrippers. Maybe a lot of business users just don't like to change or it would be a major headache moving from Intel to AMD.

Whatever the perf/$ is, i don't regret picking ADL. It never cost me anything and at the time ADL seemed like a pretty good performing setup. I am not adverse to switching to Zen 5 though, but probably not going to be a beta tester like i did with ADL though even though i have had zero problems with ADL
AMD doesn't need to "dethrone" Intel - they have always been a secondary choice. AMD simply needs to maintain enough market share to continue revenues for R&D to keep a compelling option on the market, and keep Intel from pulling dirty tricks like they did a few years ago.

Even though 12th Gen Intel is a great product, AMD products are still competitive, which helps for mindshare. AMD is no longer seen as the sub-quality brand, and is getting more visibility in pre-built systems and getting put in higher-end premium products. This all bodes well for the industry overall. If AMD keeps its momentum, there may be even more parity in the market, which of course will drive innovation. For us the consumers, this is a win!

As far as the server side goes, minds are much more closed to options in that space. Any growth by AMD can be seen as a win for the company. While it may take a long time, it could be a matter of one major adoption for the floodgates to open. AMD will have to prove they can provide the units required though, and since they are tied to fabs that are currently operating at capacity and cannot easily ramp up production, it will likely be some time before they can make serious moves.
Posted on Reply
#15
chrcoluk
Well AMD are making gains in the server space, just slower.

With the energy crisis in Europe, I expect it may accelerate as AMD is more energy efficient.

A VPS provider I use is moving their entire stock to AMD. Hetzner also increasing AMD presence as well.
Posted on Reply
#16
dir_d
I work for an MSP and all of our Sales reps and older engineers still believe Intel is the best in the server market so they wont even consider AMD when making new builds for customers. That long standing Intel bias is going to be hard to break.
Posted on Reply
#17
R0H1T
ARFhigher clocks and more cores than the Zen 4 Raphael.
Maybe higher clocks but not more cores, when Genoa is rumored to have 96 (128?) cores at the top end no way desktop chips top out at only 16 unless of course all of them are bundled with IGP ala Intel :shadedshu:
Posted on Reply
#18
noel_fs
ARFWell, I read that Raptor Lake will have higher IPC, higher clocks and more cores than the Zen 4 Raphael.
Raptor Lake: 24 cores (8 P and 16 E) / 32 threads;
Raphael: 16 cores (16 P) / 32 threads.

People even say that Zen 5 will be the last Zen because it is already an outdated micro-architecture, and AMD will eventually license ARM cores for Apple chiplets...
what???
Posted on Reply
#19
waltc
Yea, Alder Lake is really not much to write home about. In the all important PPW category, Intel is still a good bit behind AMD. Alder lake uses significantly more power than AMD's offerings, so Intel is still trying to best AMD in that category. I don't think this AMD has any plans to slow down long enough to let Intel catch up, especially in the all-important server CPU category. With the K7, AMD leapfrogged Intel, technically, but after the K7/A64/Opteron had no further plans to execute. But this AMD is much different, imo. They have leapfrogged Intel again, technically, but they've got a great roadmap ahead and so far for the past several years AMD's execution has been just about perfect...Intel is big enough and slothful enough to waste a lot of time and money and still come out alright, but if AMD keeps up its present rate of technical growth and production node improvements, it will get progressively more difficult for Intel to top AMD. I love to watch this melodrama unfold...;) I want Intel to stay in the game, of course, because I want this competition to continue to drive innovation and development. I mean it sure seems as if Intel requires AMD to bust its chops every now and then or otherwise Intel is clueless as to what it's roadmap should be. That old monopolistic thinking is like a lead weight on Intel's development efforts. Intel spends a lot of money on R&D, but what good is that if you wind up with little to nothing to show for it? AMD is putting Intel's "feet" to the fire, and I think that will be very good for Intel moving ahead.

RDNA3 and Zen 4 coming this year is an indication of things to come. We get some hints in Lisa Su's remarks that she expects 2022 to be their best year yet. So far, she's been right on the money and AMD has executed flawlessly. We won't have too much longer to wait. I'll be sitting pat on my AM4 3900X & 6900 XT, though, for a while. I may update a CPU, maybe.
Posted on Reply
#20
WeeRab
ARFWell, I read that Raptor Lake will have higher IPC, higher clocks and more cores than the Zen 4 Raphael.
Raptor Lake: 24 cores (8 P and 16 E) / 32 threads;
Raphael: 16 cores (16 P) / 32 threads.

People even say that Zen 5 will be the last Zen because it is already an outdated micro-architecture, and AMD will eventually license ARM cores for Apple chiplets...
I remember reading an article from one of AMD's top engineers about 9 months ago....And he was uber excited about Zen 5 - Which he described as a "Game Changer". He didn't even mention Zen 4....Which would indicate how confident he was in Zen 5.
Posted on Reply
#21
Tigger
I'm the only one
waltcYea, Alder Lake is really not much to write home about. In the all important PPW category, Intel is still a good bit behind AMD. Alder lake uses significantly more power than AMD's offerings, so Intel is still trying to best AMD in that category. I don't think this AMD has any plans to slow down long enough to let Intel catch up, especially in the all-important server CPU category. With the K7, AMD leapfrogged Intel, technically, but after the K7/A64/Opteron had no further plans to execute. But this AMD is much different, imo. They have leapfrogged Intel again, technically, but they've got a great roadmap ahead and so far for the past several years AMD's execution has been just about perfect...Intel is big enough and slothful enough to waste a lot of time and money and still come out alright, but if AMD keeps up its present rate of technical growth and production node improvements, it will get progressively more difficult for Intel to top AMD. I love to watch this melodrama unfold...;) I want Intel to stay in the game, of course, because I want this competition to continue to drive innovation and development. I mean it sure seems as if Intel requires AMD to bust its chops every now and then or otherwise Intel is clueless as to what it's roadmap should be. That old monopolistic thinking is like a lead weight on Intel's development efforts. Intel spends a lot of money on R&D, but what good is that if you wind up with little to nothing to show for it? AMD is putting Intel's "feet" to the fire, and I think that will be very good for Intel moving ahead.

RDNA3 and Zen 4 coming this year is an indication of things to come. We get some hints in Lisa Su's remarks that she expects 2022 to be their best year yet. So far, she's been right on the money and AMD has executed flawlessly. We won't have too much longer to wait. I'll be sitting pat on my AM4 3900X & 6900 XT, though, for a while. I may update a CPU, maybe.
Intel still lead both server and home CPU market shares, so good luck with that.
Posted on Reply
#23
mechtech
DeathtoGnomesIF its not broke, dont fix it. Its more likely businesses that might switch over, will wait until their current servers are EOL or blown up dead. That speaks to Intel reliability even if it does cost more to keep them running.
CPUs usually last a long time without issue. It's more the PSUs, mobos etc. that break first. As for running cost...............well it was more the upfront cost when EPYC first came out, for the same performance Xeon it was easily double the price.

All that aside, I think it would be better for everyone if AMD/Intel both hovered around 50/50 market share for cpus consumer and enterprise.
Posted on Reply
#24
BrainMuncher
I don't understand the numbers here. 11.6% server, 18.3% desktop, 22.5% mobile, but 27.7% overall?

What is the fourth segment that makes up the difference, is it game consoles?
Posted on Reply
#25
rawadinozor
DeathtoGnomesYea, and thats why many IT departments seem to always disagree with Corporate management.
This, i work in IT and i mantain our windoes azure pack environment, i compared amd epyc rome to intel and it was sig ificantly cheaper while faster so i convinced my managers to go for amd, since then i have ordered around 70-80 servers, i tried showing some colleagues real benchmark comparisons and explain that they could save a lot of money but some people are so ignorant, even if you confront them with facts they refuse to understand, but in the last year i noticed lots of teams in my company started ordering amd as well, adoption in enterprises takes time (apart from Facebook and the big ones) companies don't upgrade every year.
I can tell you my Dell R6515 run like a clock, i only had one server with faulty dimm and motherboard was replaced, that is it.
Hosting around 3k vms with no issues.
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment
May 28th, 2022 02:45 EDT change timezone

New Forum Posts

Popular Reviews

Controversial News Posts