• 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 Expands CPU Market Share in Q3 to 84 Percent

Even when AMD had the upper hand their percentage was still low. Intel marketing and manufacturing together with the licensing terms for the x86 license made it really hard for AMD to ever truly expand.

I am willing to bet that they will never really be able to really compete again, not on performance anyway. Unless a paradigm shift occurs (shifting FP code to graphics cores for example).
 
Was it ever much under this? Can't say i ever remember AMD ever having a significant % , even when the Athlon and A64 were kicking butt.
 
SFFNoob said:
Of the 16%, I wonder how much of it actually is AMD, I'm guessing there must be other players around still?
Click to expand...

Via? Nah, they've been single figure percent forever. I predict an ARM invasion of the DT space before we see any significant movement in this measurement. AMD should have flooded the market with cheap Zacate and Llano chips, they didn't.
 

Justintime said:
10.2 percent
Click to expand...

So it is folks as per the article in the OP, re-read it.

d_brennen said:
Via? Nah, they've been single figure percent forever. I predict an ARM invasion of the DT space before we see any significant movement in this measurement. AMD should have flooded the market with cheap Zacate and Llano chips, they didn't.
Click to expand...

Okay, thought VIA had more % but know what you mean about what AMD could have done to increase share.
 
I get around said:
Serves AMD right, they didn't have a long termist approach and it's come back to really bite them in the arse.
Click to expand...

Give them a break. Intel is one company you don't want to be competing against to be honest.

In addition to the huge difference in R&D funds and possibly the quality of their engineers, Intel's manufacturing capacity and ability is beyond anyone reach. They are leading the way. They had online 65nm manufacturing about a year earlier than AMD, IBM and TSMC and in addition their process was better performing.

I honestly think that a case for splitting manufacturing from design at Intel could be a valid avenue for the competition authorities to look.

ARM may be looking hot now, but in the long run they will not be able to compete either. The only thing that Intel has failed so far is graphics, but they are getting better. And i think the deal with AMD for 1 billion included licensing some graphics patents to them (not sure though).
 
yeah like said above, Intel are impossible almost to compete against, even in the days of K8 beating Prescott in most things Intel still absolutely dominated the market, they have many times the budget and countless other advantages, its a miracle AMD are still competing to be honest. sort out some of Bulldozers short comings and they could eat into that a bit, but to be fair the desktop market is out of AMD's reach at the present time, they might as well focus their efforts in killing off Intel in other markets with Trinity, then come back to battle another day. :p
 
doesn't exactly help with Intel shocking tactics to damage their market growth either, some of it is an total disgrace and Intel should have had a more harsh punishment. hence why I am shocked that anyone is surprised about that figure? guess they are the 'Bulldozer is worse processor ever...' crowd as well. :rolleyes:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom