AMD's desktop GPU market share hits all-time low despite RX 9070 launch, Nvidia extends its lead [Updated]

Asus
(Image credit: Asus)

Update 6/6/2025 9:00 am ET: Jon Peddie has kindly provided us with comments regarding AMD's GPU business underperformance in Q1 2025. He believes that the sources of AMD's decline in GPU shipments lie in the company's failure to accurately predict demand for its GPU products six to nine months in advance, as well as the necessity to balance its TSMC allocations between Zen CPUs and Radeon GPUs. Read the exact comments below.

AMD's desktop GPU market share, based on sales into the market, has dropped to a historic low in the latest report from Jon Peddie Research, despite the company's launch of new products during the quarter. Discrete GPU shipments for desktop PCs increased significantly both quarter-over-quarter and year-over-year in Q1 2025 and totaled 9.2 million units. However, as both AMD and Nvidia rolled out their new-generation graphics cards in the first quarter, Nvidia managed to sell millions of its new GeForce RTX 50-series GPUs and capture its highest market share, while AMD struggled to sell even 750,000 add-in-boards, which is why its share dropped to a historical low.

(Image credit: Data by Jon Peddie Research/Compiled by Tom's Hardware)
Latest Videos FromTom's Hardware
Anton Shilov
Contributing Writer

Anton Shilov is a contributing writer at Tom’s Hardware. Over the past couple of decades, he has covered everything from CPUs and GPUs to supercomputers and from modern process technologies and latest fab tools to high-tech industry trends.

  • Heat_Fan89
    Let's just hope that AMD doesn't get discouraged and bail on the GPU market and leave a 100% monopoly to Nvidia. However Steve Burke has called out AMD many times for their gross mismanagement and GPU strategy.

    As GN pointed out in the past (lowering price before release of the 7 series), that AMD doesn't seem to believe in its own products. That could be the case again that AMD didn't make enough product to meet demand because they thought it wouldn't be as popular as an Nvidia product. I remember after the 9070XT post release that some at AMD were surprised at the demand and now they had to scurry to come up with more product to meet demand.

    AMD seems to be its own worse enemy.
    Reply
  • DSzymborski
    I'm just not sure how AMD could have expected any other result. They basically lost market share selling every 9070 XT they could churn out. If they can't produce a lot more, they can't beat Nvidia on price, and if they can't beat Nvidia on price and availability, then they can't beat Nvidia. I have a 5070 Ti, but I would have been very happy to go AMD with my current GPU. But I couldn't get one at $600, $700, or even $800, so $830 for a 5070 Ti didn't seem all that bad, relatively speaking.
    Reply
  • dalek1234
    The charts go as far as Q1 '25. RDNA 4 became available to buy in the last month of that quarter.

    We are now in the last month of the 2nd quarter. I'll be curious to see those charts again for 2nd quarter, when available.
    Reply
  • -Fran-
    Historically speaking, nVidia has always produced an order of magnitude more GPUs than AMD. And this time, I wouldn't be surprised it is two orders of magnitude, considering nVidia has the China market cornered (they're effectively a monopoly there).

    Also, the usual reminder: the DYI is very vocal, but a minority still. Most of the sales are combined laptop, OEMs, SIs and DYI, out of which, I'd be surprised if it's single digits even.

    On the other hand: as long as AMD is selling everything they're producing in the markets they're targeting, they'll grow. The thing is: long term, nVidia may not be worried about AMD outselling them in DYI*, but they'll be scared and start worrying if they encrouch in the bigger markets like OEM (think Dell, HP, etc) and Laptop. SIs, while not much bigger than DYI, AMD at least has a decent presence there.

    Well, those are my thoughts.

    Regards.
    Reply
  • mitch074
    I wouldn't be surprises to learn that it's a wafer + yield problem : AMD are selling as many chips as they can churn out, true - they're also fully active chips running at a high voltage (they all undervolt quite massively).
    I wouldn't be surprised to see the market flooded with non-XT and/or GRE models in the next few months, all using cut-down chips because AMD are actually scraping the bottom of the bins... Samsung and/or TSMC have limited production capabilities, and the highest bidder gets most of them.
    Currently, that means nVidia.
    Reply
  • acadia11
    And this is what happens when you don’t have a Halo product and you don’t have a better product. Simply build a better GPU than Nvidia if you can, and people will buy AMD. Then again Nvidias lead is not just GPU but all the foundational software around it including CUDA that had led to their lead.
    Reply
  • Jabberwocky79
    Welp, ****** :confused:
    Reply
  • acadia11
    Heat_Fan89 said:
    Let's just hope that AMD doesn't get discouraged and bail on the GPU market and leave a 100% monopoly to Nvidia. However Steve Burke has called out AMD many times for their gross mismanagement and GPU strategy.

    As GN pointed out in the past (lowering price before release of the 7 series), that AMD doesn't seem to believe in its own products. That could be the case again that AMD didn't make enough product to meet demand because they thought it wouldn't be as popular as an Nvidia product. I remember after the 9070XT post release that some at AMD were surprised at the demand and now they had to scurry to come up with more product to meet demand.

    AMD seems to be its own worse enemy.
    The market doesn’t believe in AmDs GPUs some bargain hunters do, but that’s not where the money is today. But because Nvidia can always match AmD in price in any segment it doesn’t matter. AMd needs to simply build a much better.GPU and capture mind share. Simply put it doesn’t matter what segment it is people think Nvidia is better and performance results support it. There is no formula, or magic strategy be better. The beat out Intel because they started producing better products than Intel, it’s that simple. One can only hope this is AmDs Bulldozer moment until their UDNA based GPUs come along. The answer is simple.
    Reply
  • Zaranthos
    I've wanted an AMD GPU for months now. I check pricing and availability almost daily. I either can't find anything I want, or they're priced far above MSRP. Granted I'm a pretty lazy buyer and somewhat willing to wait, but in the meantime scalpers just buy most everything in sight and sell it for a profit. AMD probably makes far less than the scalper market because they don't produce enough product. The other big problem is probably nearly 100% of their cards are made in China and we all know much of that product is harder to move to the US right now at a decent price. Making almost everything in China isn't working out so well. Yes I would pay more, but not 60%+, which is what some scalpers are selling some cards for, or more.
    Reply
  • acadia11
    mitch074 said:
    I wouldn't be surprises to learn that it's a wafer + yield problem : AMD are selling as many chips as they can churn out, true - they're also fully active chips running at a high voltage (they all undervolt quite massively).
    I wouldn't be surprised to see the market flooded with non-XT and/or GRE models in the next few months, all using cut-down chips because AMD are actually scraping the bottom of the bins... Samsung and/or TSMC have limited production capabilities, and the highest bidder gets most of them.
    Currently, that means nVidia.
    gamers are a small segment of the GPU market, gamers really don’t comprehend that GPUs serve a much much larger use case than playing games today, and AMd is still losing because Nvidia still sells more to the gaming market and there is really nothing to discuss in the datacenter/AI and enterprise market. The GPU market is growing as GPUs are used for far more use cases today and Nvidia gets the lions share of every use case in terms of sales.
    Reply