Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in

AMD Steals Market Share From Intel

By - Source: IDC | B 74 comments

PC microprocessor sales climbed to $10.9 billion in the fourth quarter of last year, up 1.8 percent sequentially, and up 14.2 percent.

IDC reports that for the entire year, PC microprocessor sales jumped by 13.2 percent to more than $41 billion. Much of the increase was due to higher average selling prices, which added about 9 percent.

Both Intel and AMD were able to gain market share in individual market segments, but it was AMD that came out on top overall. Intel ended the year with 80.1 percent share, down 0.6 points from 2010, while AMD gained 0.7 points to 19.7 percent and Via dropped 0.1 points to 0.2 percent share.

According to IDC, Intel suffered a 2.6 point loss in the mobile segment (down to 83.8 percent), as AMD added 2.7 points bringing it to 16.0 percent. AMD lost in the server and workstation segment where it is now at 5.5 percent, which was down 1.5 points. Intel is overwhelmingly dominant with 94.5 percent (up 1.5 points). In desktop processors, Intel came in at 73.8 percent (+1.7 points), while AMD was down 1.6 points to 26.0 percent.

Discuss
Display all 74 comments.
This thread is closed for comments
Top Comments
  • 58 Hide
    dudemcduderson , March 16, 2012 11:15 PM
    Yeah and PC's are dead everyone don't forget, also some idiot over at IGN posted an article on how consoles are dying also. Do these mainstream people really think that I will settle for playing garbage games on a freaking Android/iPhone/iPad anytime soon? HELL NO I WON'T!!!
  • 38 Hide
    pjmelect , March 16, 2012 11:19 PM
    I hope that Piledrive will turn things around for AMD.
  • 36 Hide
    AznCracker , March 16, 2012 11:37 PM
    For laptops and budget builds, I think AMD is the way to go with their APU's
Other Comments
  • 58 Hide
    dudemcduderson , March 16, 2012 11:15 PM
    Yeah and PC's are dead everyone don't forget, also some idiot over at IGN posted an article on how consoles are dying also. Do these mainstream people really think that I will settle for playing garbage games on a freaking Android/iPhone/iPad anytime soon? HELL NO I WON'T!!!
  • 33 Hide
    CaedenV , March 16, 2012 11:18 PM
    One of these days VIA is going to come out of left field with something amazing, but I'm not holding my breath.
    Good to hear that AMD is still in the game
  • 38 Hide
    pjmelect , March 16, 2012 11:19 PM
    I hope that Piledrive will turn things around for AMD.
  • 28 Hide
    of the way , March 16, 2012 11:21 PM
    Buzz, the article states that, overall, AMD was the winner, despite losing in some segments. It appears that it was not a net loss.
  • 36 Hide
    AznCracker , March 16, 2012 11:37 PM
    For laptops and budget builds, I think AMD is the way to go with their APU's
  • 16 Hide
    dudemcduderson , March 16, 2012 11:39 PM
    of the wayBuzz, the article states that, overall, AMD was the winner, despite losing in some segments. It appears that it was not a net loss.


    I don't think you even read 25% of my post, because I was being sarcastic with the first statement. My point was that neither PCs nor consoles will be gone anytime soon and that the third and final alternative MOBILE GAMING is not anywhere near the same experience.
  • 3 Hide
    dudemcduderson , March 16, 2012 11:41 PM
    "Of the way" sorry that post was directed towards "Witcherx" not you.
  • 24 Hide
    Shin-san , March 16, 2012 11:47 PM
    People ask me what is the best general-purpose laptops, and I recommend for the low end to get one with an AMD CPU if you don't mind a lower battery life simply because they include Radeon graphics.
  • 9 Hide
    Devoteicon , March 16, 2012 11:54 PM
    I like that picture. At least Intel was nice enough to give AMD a reach around.
  • 30 Hide
    kronos_cornelius , March 17, 2012 12:02 AM
    I bet it is the Fusion chip making the difference for AMD
  • 26 Hide
    bluekoala , March 17, 2012 12:08 AM
    AMD represents excellent mobile value IMO. You can get a really solid laptop for less than 1000$. I remember the days where a pentium 133mhz was nearly 5000$. We've come a long way since then.
  • 23 Hide
    bluekoala , March 17, 2012 12:15 AM
    Submit2MyPurposeShin-san, why would someone want a lower end laptop that had a Radeon in it? If you care so little about the performance of the laptop, what is the point of the Radeon. What they likely need is a lot of battery life so you are honestly steering them in the wrong direction. You should figure out their needs first. If they want to play some games, then yes go with the AMD APU. If they are 'only' concerned about price, then they should still go with AMD for the most part although an i3 might be about the same price. If they have business computing needs, then they should go Intel. If they want more mobility, then they should go Intel. If they want high end, then they should go Intel. I would never send anyone AMD's way just for a Radeon though. They may never need its effects. This is why so many of these fools go tablet. They have no real use for a computer other than web browsing and may not need advanced gaming beyond Freescale and Angry Birdies.


    A common problem I see with laptops is "Yes I can bring my laptop over and play a game with you!"
    And then they plug it in to find that their over powered CPU does absolutely nothing for simple gaming performance. If a 1600$ laptop can't run left4dead half as good as an 800$ one even on low settings then I don't think it's considered "all around good" but more "better option to run excel when no access to a power source"
  • 13 Hide
    papaspud , March 17, 2012 12:24 AM
    AMD makes good laptop APU's for the price. They can't compete on the CPU end, but their integrated graphics blow intel's out of the water. 6 of 1 1/2 a dozen for the other, for $600 or so you can get a pretty powerful laptop running AMD chips, I know the cheap one I bought can play most any game out there right now. Desktop, Intel all the way, AMD is not hardly even competitive in this area.
  • 23 Hide
    Soda-88 , March 17, 2012 12:29 AM
    A Bad DayYou, and the gamer community, are a minority in the total computer marketshare. For every gamer, there are possibly dozens or hundreds of non-gamers or casual ones, and why should they use desktop computers if laptops or tablets can easily fill in the computing job.


    you mean computing job such as wasting time on facebook?

    workstations are called workstations for a reason and the guy you quoted was talking about gaming which will never be on par with desktop gaming in any other shape or form no matter how religiously some of the idiots preach just that

    casual 'gamers' don't even know what it means to be a gamer so they settle for less, if you want the job done you will do it on a proper device and neither productive work nor gaming will ever be done properly on anything less than a desktop pc (no, not even consoles; before i get attacked on this one, let's just mention games that require any sort of multitasking such as rts genre - it cannot be done on a 4 button controller)

    desktop pc is the king of gaming and will not be dethroned by the gimmicks we are getting fed with each year

    edit: sorry for going completely off-topic
Display more comments