Intel's Server Share Slips to 67% as AMD and Arm Widen the Gap

[AleksandarK]

In just a few years, AMD has gone from the underdog to Intel's most serious challenger in the server world. Thanks to its EPYC processors, AMD now captures about a third of every dollar spent on server CPUs, up from essentially zero in 2017. Over that same period, Intel's share has slipped from nearly 100% to roughly 63%, signaling a significant shift in what companies choose to power their data centers. The real inflection point came with AMD's Zen architecture: by mid-2020, EPYC had already claimed more than 10% of server-CPU revenues. Meanwhile, Intel's rollout of Sapphire Rapids Xeons encountered delays and manufacturing issues, leaving customers to look elsewhere. By late 2022, AMD was over the 20% mark, and Intel found itself under 75% for the first time in years.

Looking ahead, analysts at IDC and Mercury Research, with data compiled by Bank of America, expect AMD's slice of the revenue pie to grow to about 36% by 2025, while Intel drops to around 55%. Arm-based server chips are also starting to make real inroads, forecast to account for roughly 9% of CPU revenue next year as major cloud providers seek more energy- and cost-efficient options. By 2027, AMD could approach a 40% revenue share, Intel may fall below half the market, and Arm designs could capture 10-12%. Remember that these figures track revenue rather than unit sales: AMD's gains come primarily from high-end, high-core-count processors, whereas Intel still shifts plenty of lower-priced models. With AMD poised to launch its Genoa and Bergamo EPYCs and Intel banking on the upcoming E-core Xeon 6 series to regain its footing, the fight for server-CPU supremacy is far from over. Still, Intel's once-unbeatable lead is clearly under threat.



View at TechPowerUp Main Site | Source

 

[Chaitanya]

Given how long servers are deployed for things will be getting a lot worse sooner.

 

[thesmokingman]

It's freaking nutty that there are those still buying Xeons?

 

[Daven]

This is what a healthy, competitive market looks like. No one dominating, everyone fighting for a slice of the pie with better and better products. We will need the same thing to happen in the data center and client GPU markets as soon as possible.

 

[Hakker]

It's freaking nutty that there are those still buying Xeons?

Those are with long term contracts with stupid rules as Intel only. Yes Intel hard a very firm grip on the market with shady tactics that came with it. The fact that AMD took 40% of the market in 7 years is in fact more amazing. That really is punching Intel in delicate places.

 

[igormp]

It's freaking nutty that there are those still buying Xeons?

As a whole platform, there as some Xeon offerings that do make sense and can even be cheaper than the equivalent Epyc offerings.

One really clear case where Epyc is not even an option is for 4S and 8S systems, AMD only scales up to 2S systems.

 

[Daven]

As a whole platform, there as some Xeon offerings that do make sense and can even be cheaper than the equivalent Epyc offerings.

One really clear case where Epyc is not even an option is for 4S and 8S systems, AMD only scales up to 2S systems.

The interlink between sockets is usually faster with less latency than interconnects between nodes but 90%+ of the market uses 2S 1U racks connected ad infinitum.

 

[igormp]

The interlink between sockets is usually faster with less latency than interconnects between nodes but 90%+ of the market uses 2S 1U racks connected ad infinitum.

I agree, and AMD makes sense in most cases, I was just pointing out that AMD is not always the better option.

 

[Tek-Check]

Where does the author see "67%" for Intel? The table reads 62.7% by the end of 2024.

One really clear case where Epyc is not even an option is for 4S and 8S systems, AMD only scales up to 2S systems.

Intel is also gradually removing 4S/8S support. Granite Rapids SKUs on 7529 socket support only 1S/2S systems.

I agree, and AMD makes sense in most cases, I was just pointing out that AMD is not always the better option.

You need to ask hyperscalers how popular are 4S/8S solutions in 2025.

 

[Daven]

Where does the author see "67%" for Intel? The table reads 62.7% by the end of 2024.


Intel is also gradually removing 4S/8S support. Granite Rapids SKUs on 7529 socket support only 1S/2S systems.


You need to ask hyperscalers how popular are 4S/8S solutions in 2025.

Maybe the author recompiled the percent for just X86 to get 67% between AMD and Intel (excluding ARM).

Intel finally released the 4S/8S Granite Ridge products up to 86 Cores recently. Here is the list of products on the wiki page:

Granite Rapids - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

There wasn't much news regarding the remaining SKU launch but I believe they came out in February 2025. The 8S SKUs only go up to 86 cores unlike the 128 core 2S stuff that were released late last year.

 

[Tek-Check]

Maybe the author recompiled the percent for just X86 to get 67% between AMD and Intel (excluding ARM).

No. He does say later in the article 63%.

Intel finally released the 4S/8S Granite Ridge products up to 86 Cores recently.

Yes, on smaller 4710 socket. Plus, they slashed prices of 128 P core SKUs by as much as $5,000 per CPU, as reported by Tom's Hardware recently. That tells you how challenging situation is. Zen5 2P systems are up to 40% faster than equivalent Xeon6 system, while offering more competitive costs of ownership and more energy efficiency. Currently, EPYCs are more than one generation ahead of Xeons in performance, hence such big changes in server market share.

 

[phanbuey]

Intel lost so much of their talent....

I am not really sure how they will come back - they will need to bring in new people to turn it around.

 

[igormp]

Intel is also gradually removing 4S/8S support. Granite Rapids SKUs on 7529 socket support only 1S/2S systems.

Granite rapids still has 8S support on their SP offerings. The 7529 socket is for AP offerings, and those kind of offerings have always been 1/2S only given that those serve different purposes.

You need to ask hyperscalers how popular are 4S/8S solutions in 2025.

8S offerings are available in all of the biggest hyperscalers with SR, and GR should be rolling out by the end of this year. I don't think the likes of SAP HANA are going away any time soon.
They may not be as popular, and I never said those were the majority, but they are still relevant nonetheless.

Plus, they slashed prices of 128 P core SKUs by as much as $5,000 per CPU, as reported by Tom's Hardware recently.

You can get prices way bellow that for any reasonably sized quote, fwiw. Same applies to AMD's public prices, ofc, but Intel is being way more aggressive with discounts (and the reduced revenue pointed in OP demonstrates that).

 

[TheinsanegamerN]

It's freaking nutty that there are those still buying Xeons?

Not really. When you run VM,s it is HIGHLY recommended for stability to keep your CPUs from the same vendor. So if you have servers that are on separate upgrade cycles, what are you going to do, replace half your servers years early? Risk running half of them out of warranty?

It's a testimony to how good the AMD chips are that they've gotten this far, I remember when intel had 95% of the market and nobody ever thought AMD would make headroom.

 

[ThomasK]

Intel lost so much of their talent....

I am not really sure how they will come back - they will need to bring in new people to turn it around.

Intel isn't going to bring anyone back anytime soon—quite the opposite, in fact. That is, until the shareholders are deemed satisfied.

The company as a whole is still laying people off, left and right.

Intel Winds Down Automotive Division, Prepares for Major Layoffs

Intel has confirmed plans to phase out its in-house automotive chip team and lay off most of the employees in that segment. In a memo to staff on Tuesday, the company stated that it will honor existing contracts with vehicle manufacturers and suppliers but will essentially dissolve the unit that...

www.techpowerup.com

how popular are 4S/8S solutions in 2025.

Niche use case, at this point. Ain't gonna get Intel any % of market share.

 

[Tek-Check]

They may not be as popular, and I never said those were the majority, but they are still relevant nonetheless.

Sure, but the overall numbers presented in the article are hard to ignore. 4S/8S offerings are not the biggest problem of Intel. Performance of Xeons is. Current Xeons are more than one generation behind, if you look into the graph I posted above.

 

[igormp]

Not really. When you run VM,s it is HIGHLY recommended for stability to keep your CPUs from the same vendor. So if you have servers that are on separate upgrade cycles, what are you going to do, replace half your servers years early? Risk running half of them out of warranty?

That's not relevant whatsoever for most applications hosted in hyperscalers tbh. I've worked with clusters of 10k+ nodes and always used mixed instance types in order to not face issues regarding availability of individual types.

Sure, but the overall numbers presented in the article are hard to ignore. 4S/8S offerings are not the biggest problem of Intel. Performance of Xeons is. Current Xeons are more than one generation behind, if you look into the graph I posted above.

Performance is not an issue, pricing is.
But I'm not sure what you're trying to get at. AMD doesn't cover all use cases, but I've already said that their CPUs do make sense for most cases nonetheless.

 

[TechLurker]

It's a testimony to how good the AMD chips are that they've gotten this far, I remember when intel had 95% of the market and nobody ever thought AMD would make headroom.

I still remember when server owners were also concerned to see if AMD would drop the ball on EPYC the same way they dropped the ball on Opteron. AMD had to do a major charm offensive and offer a truly amazing product to rebuild the trust lost after they gave up the server space for a better part of a decade or so.

Ironically, it was with Threadripper that AMD dropped the ball hard on, what with their indecision on supporting TR as thoroughly as Ryzen or EPYC until relatively recently. Now if only they'd offer some 12 and 16 core options in the premium consumer end, instead of only the prosumer end. Or heck, a new 8 core for those who want more I/O than cores.

 

[ARF]

To this date - still true:

256,255 views Jul 26, 2017
Intel is the world's most abusive, monopolistic tech company.

 

[mb194dc]

Can't wait until modern CPUs proliferate in data centers. The reality is reliability is king for these use cases and it takes years for data centers to change hardware.

 

[Vayra86]

Goes to show the power of consistency... because this trend ain't stopping anytime soon. The flywheel is moving, Intel's gonna have to stick a huge plank in there to stop it.

Now, AMD, apply this to your GCN RDNA UDNA releases k?

Those are with long term contracts with stupid rules as Intel only. Yes Intel hard a very firm grip on the market with shady tactics that came with it. The fact that AMD took 40% of the market in 7 years is in fact more amazing. That really is punching Intel in delicate places.

I remember them (Intel) predicting they might lose a total of 18% enterprise share to AMD. Oh boy how they miscalculated

 

[Panther_Seraphin]

$$$ is the big one

"Your telling me we can get an Intel powered offering from SI X for 75% of the cost for an equivalent AMD setup from SI Y? Oh and they are offering their 5 year support package at a discount? SI X is where we go." We all know that the EPYC options have been the superior option in most use cases for multiple generations but bean counters always have the final say on any purchase in companies. This is why there has been a slow decline for Intel over the last few years but its only been getting worse recently as the cost/performance arguments have been getting less and less competitive even with their heavy discounts.

Regarding 4 and 8S systems, they are very niche use case now and are mainly aimed at people who are limited by U space. So either the hyper dense (talking thousands of nodes in a single datacenter) or those being charged by U space being utilised by their hosting company. Otherwise it makes more sense to utilise more 2S systems for a multitude of reasons.

 

[Daven]

I still remember when server owners were also concerned to see if AMD would drop the ball on EPYC the same way they dropped the ball on Opteron. AMD had to do a major charm offensive and offer a truly amazing product to rebuild the trust lost after they gave up the server space for a better part of a decade or so.

Ironically, it was with Threadripper that AMD dropped the ball hard on, what with their indecision on supporting TR as thoroughly as Ryzen or EPYC until relatively recently. Now if only they'd offer some 12 and 16 core options in the premium consumer end, instead of only the prosumer end. Or heck, a new 8 core for those who want more I/O than cores.

AMD just released Grado Epyc processors on AM5 and the rumors say the chiplet count may double for Zen 6. So you could be getting 32C/64T Epycs on AM5 for under $1000 in 2026.

 

[TechLurker]

AMD just released Grado Epyc processors on AM5 and the rumors say the chiplet count may double for Zen 6. So you could be getting 32C/64T Epycs on AM5 for under $1000 in 2026.

The main issue is that they really need to increase the PCI lane counts to match, esp. on top-end X#70 AM5 or future AM6+ boards that are also starting to be priced at the same level as mid-level prosumer-grade boards for TR that have more lanes. The existing 24-28 or so lanes don't really cut it any more at that cost.

The B#50 series of boards could stand to have the same increased lane counts, just a PCIe generation behind save for the first PCIe slot and the first M.2 slot. Still would provide a good number of I/O regardless, and would be ideal for cheaper home servers that only need a 6 or 8 core and mostly I/O for NVMe or SATA raid cards.

 

[Six_Times]

The new ceo