-
Competitor rules
Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.
Intel Allegedly Playing Dirty Again To Undercut AMD’s Ryzen
- Thread starter Simon Belmont
- Start date
Does that include DIY sales? There is no mention of it in the breakdown and some of these reaserch papers have a habit of missing important data like that, for example JPR have this wired habit of calculating PC hardware sales on GPU's, which they include iGPU's, assuming that everything has GPU's, so Ryzen doesn't even exist unless its APU's. which is ridiculous.
Anyway, my point being for every 1 percentage point AMD gain is not just a gain for AMD, its a loss for Intel, a company that is so bloated it needs every percentage point sale it has, its not just about AMD selling more, its as much if not more about chipping away at Intel's support foundations.
Soldato
- Joined
- 1 May 2013
- Posts
- 9,917
- Location
- M28
Wow, that's like Sherlock level of deduction skills right there
There could not be any other factors involved, nope...... 
You bored today
Yes.
"AMD has reached 20.1% of the desktop PC market, notching its highest penetration since the fourth quarter of 2013. AMD has grown its desktop PC market share for 12 consecutive quarters.
Here's Dean McCarron's analysis of his report:
"A bit more than 60% of AMD's increased desktop shipments came from what I'd consider high-end (e.g. not dual-core or APU units, so Matisse and a tiny bit of Pinnacle Ridge cores that remain)."
"I'd say 100% of the gain came from the high end for them, because Intel's high end was flat and AMD's high end grew, while Intel's entry-level business out-grew AMD's. Intel's i3/Pentium/Celeron grew very strongly and if you limited the share to just entry-level, Intel would have gained in the third quarter.""
AMD Reaches Highest CPU Market Share Since 2007, Q3 2020 Report (Updated) | Tom's Hardware
This is my point, when they talking about "Desktop Market Share" they are talking about prebuilds, like this for example. https://rog.asus.com/uk/desktops/mid-tower/rog-strix-ga15-series/
There is nothing in this about CPU's people buy in a Box, you never get a complete picture from these researchers, its really annoying. Its because they get their data from OEM's, retailers are too large and too wide spread for them to bother with, too much like hard work. They are actually pretty useless.
They just pretend the DIY market doesn't exist, just like they pretend the Console market which is also X86 based, doesn't exist despite it being absolutely huge
Basically what this is telling us is:
Laptop: 2:8
Desktop prebuilds: 2:8
DIY Retail: No Data.
Consoles: No Data.
Last edited:
This report does not count DIY. It looks at pre builts that people buy from Dell, HP etc - whether it be laptops, desktops etc. Intel still has deals in place that restrict OEM from using AMD parts
it's the equivalent of all the reports we have that track video games sales, but they only look physical sales and not digital despite digital being 80% of market revenue.
If 4k actually takes 10 minutes of his time and calls up a few PC stores and asks them what CPU brand is most popular there will be only one answer, AMD by a MASSIVE MARGIN
Last edited:
Only to a certain extent.
The current 80/20 marketshare is far too unbalanced, and the profit share is more 95/5, so I'm quiet happy for Intel to become the budget option for the next few years.
Once the two are more like 50/50 in both marketshare and profits then neither would have the dominance to succeed with dirty tricks.
I believe that this is what is required to get true fair competition, whereas if Intel deliver another Conroe moment in 2022 it may reduce the prices of the Ryzen 6000, but if Intel then get to 90%+ the following years that will not be good for those consumers who look long-term.
And it is knowing that Intel cannot and will not change their spots, which means I would prefer not to buy their products unless they have a crazy lead.
There is no way AMD could even come close to volume of Intel to be 40-60. And then you have companies with old school and lazy IT, or ecosystems in place to not allow any major changes. I don't know of any global source of DIY market either, but there is sales figures from that german shop, whatever its called. I'm sure it reflects majority of retailers/e-shops. I never pay attention to any *Marks or steams
The report includes DIY, the overall number is so low because the OEMs ship virtually zero AMD machines and the DIY offsets that.
The corporations and companies supply their offices only with Intel machines.
Mores stupid by Intel - I don't know if they have a legal right to do:
As reported yesterday, Intel's first discrete graphics cards for desktops in more than two decades will not be available at retail and will only be sold as parts of pre-built mainstream systems. Apparently, they will also only be compatible with select Intel platforms and will not work with AMD's CPUs at all.
Intel's Iris Xe DG1 Graphics Cards Not Compatible with AMD, Older Systems | Tom's Hardware
If so, AMD must lock its Ryzens to work only with Radeons, and its Radeons to work only on Ryzen platforms.
As reported yesterday, Intel's first discrete graphics cards for desktops in more than two decades will not be available at retail and will only be sold as parts of pre-built mainstream systems. Apparently, they will also only be compatible with select Intel platforms and will not work with AMD's CPUs at all.
Intel's Iris Xe DG1 Graphics Cards Not Compatible with AMD, Older Systems | Tom's Hardware
If so, AMD must lock its Ryzens to work only with Radeons, and its Radeons to work only on Ryzen platforms.
Yeah, let Intel dig itself deeper into bog by their arrogance and stupidity.
There is no way AMD could even come close to volume of Intel to be 40-60. And then you have companies with old school and lazy IT, or ecosystems in place to not allow any major changes. I don't know of any global source of DIY market either, but there is sales figures from that german shop, whatever its called. I'm sure it reflects majority of retailers/e-shops. I never pay attention to any *Marks or steams
Oh you would be surprised, AMD have 20% of the OEM market, Laptop and desktop, and its growing its not just Mindfactory.de, Rainforest.com also had Ryzen locking out the top 10 CPU sales pretty much entirely for all of 2020.
We don't know what the DIY market is doing because researchers are too lazy to research it, but from every bit of data that is published they all say the same thing, its about 80-20, of course we should all just ignore it and assume that actually Intel still sells more CPU's than AMD in the DIY market where people make choices on the CPU directly. Right?
Last edited:
One other thing.
People aren't in offices anymore, people are at home using their personal computers. And where Dell sell offices 1000's laptop's every year Intel are practically paying for that to happen through intransitives, no wonder they are borrowing about $7 Billion a year. A company making a ton of money doesn't borrow 10% of its entire revenue every year. Rishi Sunak might say that's a serious problem.
People aren't in offices anymore, people are at home using their personal computers. And where Dell sell offices 1000's laptop's every year Intel are practically paying for that to happen through intransitives, no wonder they are borrowing about $7 Billion a year. A company making a ton of money doesn't borrow 10% of its entire revenue every year. Rishi Sunak might say that's a serious problem.
Associate
- Joined
- 6 Dec 2013
- Posts
- 2,071
- Location
- Nottingham
Intel reported record available spare cash to spend in the billions early this year, can't reca where I read it, but it doesn't seem right if they are borrowing billions. Something shady going off there. Why would they need to with record free cash.
If i borrow 10 grand, i have 10 grand to squander.
Associate
- Joined
- 6 Dec 2013
- Posts
- 2,071
- Location
- Nottingham
I'm talking like 40plus billion. If I recall it was way more.
After operation costs AMD had 4 Billion to spend, and yes they spent about half of it, boasting about how much money you have to spend is one thing, but spending it is another, Intel did this before, even made a stack of cash slide out of it comparing their stack to AMD's stack, but what do they gain from it? they are still losing market share to AMD, who don't have and debts worth mentioning, 300 Million, that's a credit float... Intel 40 Billion, that's 40,000 Million.
Associate
- Joined
- 6 Dec 2013
- Posts
- 2,071
- Location
- Nottingham
True, still seems shady to me borrowing billions when you already have billions to spare.. apparently.
Intel almost killed off AMD by throwing money at OEM's, they literally gave their CPU's away and on top of that paid Dell a crap ton of money (Billions) not to use AMD's CPU's at all, this is fact, its public record.
The thing is in doing that they pushed AMD to the brink of bankruptcy, Intel invested in the short term to kill AMD off in the longer term, it worked, AMD spent the next decade with no money teetering on the edge, they sold everything they had to survive, including thier home, the building they put up in 1969.
Its obvious the only way Intel know to defeat AMD is to throw money about.