"....attempting to counter Intel's Ivy Bridge launch with a series of price cuts to its A-Series APU and FX Series processors."
People will always lean to the more inexpensive item, but they will also go after the biggest and meanest machines they can get their hands on. So smart move on AMD for price cuts but in all honosty they need to get their act together and come out with a processor to compete with Intels processor!
I agree but really just short of 1% ummmmm that's 1%!
or just under 1% ah I don't see how you get excited about 1% but less than 1% is something I guess and in a short amount of time.
HAHAHAHA ya @rapid1, good point, AMD is being dominated.
"AMD's x86 market share jumped nearly a full percentage point from 18.2 percent to 19.1 percent in the first quarter of 2012, compared to Intel, which dropped from 81 percent to 80.2 percent, nearly the same margin as AMD's gain."
Indeed. AMD should be getting more customers because of the quality of their parts - not simply because of their price cuts. Lame way to win market share as it doesn't at all mean that AMD is doing well. It just means they're selling out.
"One of the things that is clear is that the market is adopting new technology faster than it used to. I would expect Ivy Bridge to ramp aggressively,"
This might just be too fast though :P, Need lots of money to keep up with all them technology :)
Like rapid said, lets see more change them 1%+- ... lol
ya i agree! they need to figure something out!
any change at all in AMD direction really helps them, thy cannot keep up with the quality or speed of their products like intel can. For intel you pray a high Premium for AMD you pay a less and get comparable performance atleast for the time being. If your o a budget and have no pride go AMD and in 15 years if they have managed to win a larger market share they might be as good or even better than intel.
Good for AMD. I think it's obvious Intel has the technical lead by far at this point, but we know how bad things can be when there's no competition.
What part of "Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn" don't you understand?
i'm sorry to inform you guys, but all of you are noobs :) - except 3vi1
taking no care in actual mathematics, that is...
18 to 19% is actually ~5% CPUs amd sells MORE than it did before
81 to 80% is some 1.something% less intel CPUs LESS than before
knowing this, it's not so insignificant - imagine you get 1% pay raise on expense of, say your CEO's 1% decrease in salary - not a big deal, right? only problem is that guy earns like 1,000 times more than you do, so his 1% is ten times your initial salary
true, this won't shift the world's CPU balance of power, but it does mean *something* to AMD and much less for Intel
and yes, before someone notices, i support strongly AMD, not because it's red or i'm holding for a straw that it will beat Intel in high-performance market again, but for a well-known fact what Intel does when there is no adequate (or any) competition. just look (unproven) story of bad overclocking of ivy bridge cause of savings on thermal compound. and translate that to a next 10-year of "Intel does what it pleases cause it has no competition". granted, AMD may have been acted the same if positions were shifted, but now it's not the case. or will ever be, if healthy competition continue to exist. and yet all of you laugh at AMD and its 1%, but i would like to see if you would still be laughing if it ceased to exist and Intel took sole x86 crown once again
Sure I would like to see real competition in the CPU market as it's good for consumers (Economics...).
BUT especially these days, people want the best for their hard-earned money. Yes, Intel (used to be) pricey (the price difference these days is not as large as you think), but you know what you'll get with an Intel. And, what you'll get with a "bulldozer"...sigh.
I'm not for rewarding failures for the sake of "competition". If AMD wants the sales and market share so badly, then they should EXECUTE their plans properly, which they have sucked at since their inception.
The only market in which AMD is a viable alternative is in the notebook and other low-end laptops (I have a brazos laptop and it's nice for what I need). For the past year, I have been unable to bring myself to recommend AMD to anyone I know for their desktop PCs, even the budget users. If "piledriver"/"vishera" doesn't come good, it'll be very bad for AMD, as Intel has (sort of) fixed their prices a little.
you have a point
sad but true...
luckily for me, i don't have current need to build a new desktop and consequently won't have to fill Intel pockets with my money. AMD made a series of bad designs (add a drop of bad luck also) and lost much of its competitiveness... and even when AMD was "sweeping the floor" with Intel's more costly solutions, Intel still held a substantially larger share of market.
i too don't put much hope that piledriver will be actually competitive in anything except maybe in budged segment
only bright thing in AMD foreseeable future is possible "large increase in opencl/directcompute supporting software (and OS)" which would utilize its superior on-die GPU, and perhaps lead to a processor which is superior in some uses and inferior in other. luckily for AMD, Intel entered this (possibly lost from beginning) opencl race, so scenario isn't that impossible as it looked few years ago
if AMD (hopefully) survives, we might be spared of "revolutionary" Intel suggestions as "to pay money for unlocking full CPU power" (this actually made me so mad that i renewed my vow not to buy anything Intel as long as i live, and truthfully i didn't follow this information further, so i don't actually know whether it is true or not - if it was a marketing trick i admit it got me, but clear remembrance of what Intel did with pentium2/3 and matching celerons is good enough for me to consider this as very likely scenario for the future)
my friend suggested to buy amd k6, it is very efficient and moin expensive than the intel. Intel this time, based on their the publicity that AMD microchip. The problem arises which is better price / performance (AMD or Intel). How 3D chip cost,
GPGPU Radeon HD ... technology is best> 1000Gflops.
NEWS TIPS |
This site is intended for informational and entertainment purposes only. The contents are the views and opinion of the author and/or hisassociates. All products and trademarks are the property of their respective owners. All content and graphical elements areCopyright © 1999 - 2014 David Altavilla and HotHardware.com, LLC. All rights reserved. Privacy and Terms