Sandy Bridge And Fusion Claim 60% of x86 CPU Market

This is good news for AMD. I hope they get back on track and release badass CPUs that will challenge Intel's foothold. That way.. prices will drop

don't want 2 c any Intel stuff from now on.

I can only hope Bulldozer will be met with such success

Could you clarify the second paragraph? It infers Intel vs Intel, not Intel vs AMD. Thanks

I assume AMD is 5.5%?

Somethings not right here...

Intel vs. Intel. The voices in my head say this will be the fight of the century!

Typo in the server section. It's a one-company fight.

The reason I won't buy Intel any more: To upgrade my socket 775 system to the quickest CPU available for the form factor, more than an I5 and nearly as much as an I7. I can build an entire system for $300.00 from AMD for the price of their years old technology.

Been hearing about Bulldozer for years...who cares. I doubt it would challenge SandyBridge and when Ivy comes out AMD will be 2 generations behind....again.

Im waiting for Bulldozer , its bound to be faster than my i5 750. I would upgrade my intel but I cant bc i need new mobo. And amd keeps the same socket for a long time so that also helps for my future purchase.

Sure you can build an entire PC for the price of an Intel I7 2600k (not realistically an entire system but you could upgrade the core components) but you would be moving from one extint system to one that is only a few days away from being extint. Deals on Newegg and Tiger are only deals because they need to get that stuff gone. Sure you will notice gains and will be able to squeak into the new year of low FPS gaming but try your hand at a top end build just once and you'll be hooked. I went from an evga 8600GTS to the 9800GX2 and thought I was in heaven (the 9800GX2 was actually just a single slot version of the 8600GTS' in SLI config). The 9800GX2 finally toasted so I splurged and got the brand new AMD 6990 and hot damn am I in love!!! Paired that $700 purchase up with a $300 27" Viewsonic and I've never loved my gaming experience so much.

Long story short, you get what you pay for. Bang for buck yeah maybe AMD but AMD doesn't produce enough bang to push gaming PC's to the max like Intel

Or go with Intel now since the 1155 socket will be used for Ivy Bridge as well. Plus 1155 motherboards are just hitting shelves in the last week that have PCIE 3.0(). Pretty future proof having Sata III, USB 3.0 and PCIE 3.0 along with knowing you can plop an Ivy bridge CPU in them later.

My main PC is an AMD rig now but Intel just looks better and better these days.

Funny how that typo is somewhat truthful at the same time.

And my final comment was of course only specific to CPU's. Of course AMD shines in the video card market and that's a different story. I just wanted to clarify before getting flamed

I haven't really updated my Intel-side news for a couple months, but last time I saw, the Ivy Bridge chipset will use the 1155 socket, but Cougar point PCH chipset won't support the new 22nm. I'll go look it up right now, but might want to double check the facts.

AMD PROBABLY WILL NOT SEE ANY MORE MARKET SHARE GROWTH.

INTEL'S SECRET EXCLUSIVITY-BRIBES AND THREATS )TARGETING RETAILERS AND MANUFACTURERS) WILL PRETTY MUCH ENSURE THAT CONSUMERS WON'T FIND AMD PRODUCTS TO BUY?

This is a great article on how Intel bribes retailers and manufacturers to not sell AMD products.

http://mygaming.co.za/news/hardwar [...] ating.html

but than take into account that even with the socket 775, you may not be able to install the fastest gpu of that line, i tried with my old mb before it fried, it wouldn't take it... i despise intel and its cpus, i like how amd, if you have the right socket, everything will work in it.

2 gen behind, and yet, still damn good.
i would rather have a true quad core than 2 cores and 2 logical any day




its not so much a bribe as a "done you dare F***ING sell those cpus or else WE wont give you a DISCOUNT on our cpus ANY MORE"

you know, amd may have to sell cheap because they arent "as good" but seriously, every part of their business i like, from gpu to the cpu, they dont f*** people like their competitors do.

I'd like to remind anyone considering bulldozer that AMD will be introducing a new socket next year. Basically, if you already have an AM3+ socket, great, you can upgrade right away. If you don't, better wait 6-8 months.

Unfortunately you're not going to have much of an upgrade path on AM3+ either. That argument would make a lot more sense if you were already on the AM3+/AM3 platform, and upgrading to an FX processor from a Phenom II or Athlon II. AMD is releasing a new platform in 2012, along with an updated Bulldozer architecture on socket FM2.

If Platform longevity is your primary concern, then I would either invest in LGA 1155 and go with Sandy Bridge (Ivy Bridge will run on the same platform next year), or wait for Socket FM2 and AMD's revised Bulldozer processors in 2012.

Some interesting news cropped up yesterday. It looks like the FX-8150P, AMD's highest end processor based on the upcoming Bulldozer architecture, will debut at the $300 price point. This means that in all likelihood it'll actually be performance competitive with the i7-2600. This would be very impressive, and a huge performance boost for AMD.

http://www.guru3d.com/news/amd-eig [...] -cost-300/

The socket might but it'll probably need a motherboard upgrade never-the-less. How many socket 775 incompatible motherboard version are there really? 7 or more by now?

It's highly unlikely that Intel will abandon this style of add-on sales tactics that you have to upgrade your motherboard every time you want to upgrade your CPU anytime soon.

Intel can suck it. I'll never buy another proc from them. AMD has shown 80-90% of performance with 1/3 the price is a MUCH better value.

It's basically like this. AMD is destroying Intel on the integrated GPU front. This means low cost laptops, entry level desktops, and mom-and-pop style computers. This, however, changes the moment you go above entry level and a dual core i3 nearly eats alive a quad core Fusion chip as soon as a dedicated GPU is thrown in the mix. AMD offers good value, but value orientated systems are where AMD does well at the moment.

On the enthusiast level I'm concerned that AMD will need to release (according to what little information is actually out about Bulldozer) an eight core chip running at nearly 4 GHZ to be "competitive" with a quad i7. Surely I can't be the only one who remembers the Pentium 4 days and how everyone decried turning up the clockspeed of chips just to match or creep over competing chips a little bit performance-wise. How things change when the company wears green instead of blue.

AMD has the GPU thing licked if only they can reinvent the wheel in their CPU department. At least with fusion they are playing more to their own strength.

Yes it does, and plenty enough, yet that's basically what most people think and it is the reason why AMD hasn't gained more ground.

In most games, you won't notice a big enough gain going for that high priced Intel vs a high end AMD. Your eyes can't tell 3-5 fps less on something already running 60+ fps.

60% of processor shipments, not CPU market per total. Of course people are gonna choose a new platform over old ones if they buy a PC now. Getting a new platform was always the smart thing to do. AM3 and LGA1156 motherboards will be completely gone a few years from now. Maybe second hand... But there's a big risk there, you don't know how the owner treated it or how long it will last. You can only speculate.

Except those are the first generation, the first of their kind. It's usually a good idea to go with second and sometimes third generation products, after they iron out all the bugs and design flaws. Learned this from experience with video cards and HDDs over the years (don't get a 1.5 TB HDD when the 1 TB storage process is more mature).

This article is BS.

28.9% + 70.9% desktop is 99.8%. Sorry bud, but Intel and AMD do not have 100% of the x86 CPU market. There are others, and they account for more than the margin of error.

There is only one x86 CPU manufacturer not mentioned, and they had 0.3% of desktop market share in 2010, so 0.2% now is probably accurate within a fraction of a percent.

Do people ever proof read their articles? How could this statement possibly be true?

"According to IDC, Intel was able to extend its dominance in servers and added 0.6 points to 94.5%, while Intel stood at 5.5%. "

If this were true Intel would own all the market. I think they ment "while AMD stood at 5.5%. "

Bulldozer is at the bottom of the list for AMD. The desktop is dying and there is no point in trying to compete with giant Intel. They have moved on and put their resources into other markets, hence the BD delay, and that's the smart move on their part. They really have no need for BD to even be competative against SB. I mean look how many PII X4's they are still selling because they offere excellent price/performance. 99% of users don't need anything faster than a PII X4.