News AMD market share reaches 21%

http://www.bit-tech.net/news/2006/01/26/amd_market_share/

 

Intel must be starting to feel the crunch now. Maybe now their marketing team will let the engineers do their job of making fast processors and systems properly.

 

good for amd, lets see more market competition and better rpices for us endusers as a result.

 

I'm very proud of you, Minimal, that was completely non-fanboy!!!

And I agree. This is good news for BOTH companies, because it will force the heat to be turned up more on Intel to continue advancing the market...every time they take a step forward, they're starting to find AMD on their heels, fixing and refining the product in their wake.

 

Didnt they do that all on their own?

there's at least 2 puns in there, im quite proud of that and equally as shocked you let that one slip.

 

I must be slipping in my old age.

 

I think this is due to AMDs new fab. They are now able to produce the number of chips needed to gain this share of the market. I think thier investment in the new fab is paying off

 

This is good stuff in my opinion. Intel are making some fantastic chips right now, in the form of their mobile ones. They totaly pwn anything AMD have out in that sector, and if they focus their development on that core, as they have done with Yonah, and further that, they'll have something really worth selling. On the other hand, AMD have desktop dominance right now, and are a great choice across the spectrum of needs for desktop users. So because these companies will have to compete now, they're just going to make two already great product areas even better.

Great news for us.

 

In my opinion this is just the end result of AMD making very good (if not better) processors (than Intel). Except for the notebook market AMD got the fastest processors out there. And they produce less heat than Intel ones. And they are cheaper.
Maybe Intel would think about >130W TDP of P4 EE again.

 

Yey, i'd like AMD to go mainstream and more competition means lower prices for consumers Yey! lol so it's all good

all pc's currently in my house are AMD

 

With those space heaters intel was making that have less real world performance than the cooler cheaper AMD's do, it was only a matter of time.

 

AMD's only claim to fame until relatively recently (<1.5GHz?) was that they were cheaper than Intel, which in the total cost of a full new PC system didn't amount to a great deal. But now all those penny-pinching geek upgraders are in positions of power... and know the 21st Century product is good.

 

good for AMD, glad to see that things are getting switched over to AMD

 

Same as everyone else - yay! Lower prices all around as a result probably (if the recently-announced opteron price-murderings are any indication!), and forcing AMD to keep working hard and Intel to get some innovation going. I love the idea of low-power (consumption) chips in the desktop - I never turn mine off, and energy bills aren't going down. I've started switching some old incandescent light bulbs to the CF energy-effecient type, and I think intel has the right idea, seeing as the laptop-oriented Core Duo went into the iMac as well as the MBP. Low-noise lovers and overclockers alike seem to enjoy the few s479 desktop boards out there so they can use a 25w chip and have just as much computing power as that 115w beast-toaster, even if there's a slight price premium off-the-bat.

It's almost funny though, now if you're looking for a really cheap chip, Intel's often the better price. Performance won't be equal, but if you're building something like a home fileserver or a "my parents need to type their recipies" machine that doesn't need a whole lot of power, a $75 Celeron isn't a bad deal (mostly because of overall costs; there's actually a decent selection of boards geared towards that market, meaning ones with onboard video), and they also have the cheapest (at the moment, anyways) introductory dual-core processor.

Of course I think as Intel transitions to 65nm (and AMD shortly after), we should be, in theory, seeing more price cuts. Smaller process means smaller chips, which should translate to both higher chip yield and less material cost (as the chips are physically smaller), both of which should theoretically mean lower cost to us. AMD defiantely has the best chips performance-wise, but I think they should try to introduce a proc that competes price-wise with the Pentium 820.

 

I'm proud to say I contributed two Opterons to AMD's success

 

I prefer to wonder how VIA is doing? (they are competition too ya know)

 

Who cares? Via have an insanely small market share.

 

http://forums.bit-tech.net/showthread.php?t=106111
they use no power but they're still slow as hell

 

In desktop PC's, thats true, but Vias success is growing and growing in the integrated systems market, many of the things you can see, that have processors and microchips in them, but aren't PC's, will have Via stuff inside them. Musn't forget that most of the money isn't ever with the stuff we're all intrested in, just like in graphics cards the money lies with being the biggest low end card OEM supplier(like ATI are right now) and not with having the best card, in CPU's, the money is not right at the highend FX-60's, or even neccesarily mostly in the PC market