backtop


Print 38 comment(s) - last by Diesel Donkey.. on May 13 at 5:27 PM

AMD grows its market share after five consecutive quarterly share losses

AMD has been having a rough fiscal year with significant losses, but the chipmaker is trying everything to return to profitability. The company spun off its foundry operations this year and last week AMD announced that it was merging its CPU and GPU operations into a single department.

Over the last five quarters, AMD has posted declining market share reports PC World. That changed during Q1 2009 with AMD growing its market share as Intel's market share declined. The share of the market AMD holds reached 22.3% for the quarter, a growth of 4.6% compared with Q4 2008.

Intel saw its market share slip 4.7% to 77.3% of the entire CPU market reports IDC. PC World reports that AMD can thank a pricing advantage over Intel for its increased market share. A strong surge in desktop shipments also fueled AMD's growth. AMD saw a total increase in shipments of 13% while Intel faced a 16% decline in shipments for the quarter.

The reason for Intel's decline in shipments is blamed in part on suppliers not purchasing as they depleted inventory of excess mobile processors, particularly Atom parts. Shipments of Atom processors dropped 33% in Q1 2009.

AMD's market share for mobile processors reached 15%, an improvement of 4.7% for the quarter. Intel's portion of the market dropped to 84.3% from 89.1% the previous quarter. AMD did see declines in its server processor market share. AMD lost 1.2% of the server market, all of which was picked up by Intel bringing it to 89.3% of the server market.

Global processor shipments declined for the quarter to reach about 65 million shipped during Q1 2009. That number marks a 13% year-over-year decline in shipments and a 10.9% decline compared to Q4 2008.



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

Profit?
By phatboye on 5/12/2009 10:53:51 AM , Rating: 5
What is more important now is did AMD finally turn a profit after so many quarters of announcing losses now that they have spun off their manufacturing operations.




RE: Profit?
By Natfly on 5/12/2009 10:57:36 AM , Rating: 2
RE: Profit?
By jonmcc33 on 5/12/2009 11:16:53 AM , Rating: 1
Yes, there's a difference between profit and market share.

Their market share might have increased due to lack of overall sales across the board. Nothing to cheer about IMO.


RE: Profit?
By Oregonian2 on 5/12/2009 3:24:38 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Yes, there's a difference between profit and market share.


In the current U.S. Auto market, profitability is only with those with tiny market share (Suburu is one I recall running profitably).

In traditional use of "market share", it's usually something companies would "buy" through short-term losses so that they could have higher profits once the market matured and those with low shares dropped out (even though that target plethora of profit environment never seemed to actually happen in real life).

Marketshare is good if it's the result of doing well, not necessarily good in and of itself. I think GM still has the #1 marketshare for sales of cars in the USA, see how well that works. :-)


RE: Profit?
By mofo3k on 5/12/2009 11:05:03 AM , Rating: 2
Phase 1 - Collect Underpants

Phase 2 - ?

Phase 3 - Profit

See, simple!


RE: Profit?
By Jeffk464 on 5/12/2009 12:56:24 PM , Rating: 4
Ya, love or hate AMD the competition has really helped to keep intel from ripping us off.


Wow
By unrated on 5/12/2009 2:05:39 PM , Rating: 5
A 4.6% gain in total market share means they went from 17.7% to 22.3%. But, from AMD's perspective this is a 26% (22.3% / 17.7%) increase in only one quarter which seems huge to me. Am I missing something?




RE: Wow
By kontorotsui on 5/12/2009 2:18:28 PM , Rating: 3
You missed this:

quote:
Global processor shipments declined for the quarter to reach about 65 million shipped during Q1 2009. That number marks a 13% year-over-year decline in shipments and a 10.9% decline compared to Q4 2008.


While 26% more CPU are, as a percentage, made by AMD, it doesn't mean AMD sold 26% more.


Budget
By Screwballl on 5/12/2009 11:04:13 AM , Rating: 1
With the tight financial status of so many people including us techs, many of us are looking for cheaper ways to build our systems for the time being rather than jumping in $300+ for an i7 or slightly outdated Core2. This means AMD fits the bill nicely. Considering you can get a very nice AM2+ system built for well under $500, AMD is in an excellent position to provide for the masses in these recessionary times with strong but low cost processors.




RE: Budget
By rcc on 5/12/2009 11:13:07 AM , Rating: 2
Now all they need to learn is that the sales plan of "loose a little on each one and make it up in volume" doesn't work.

Profit? What's that.... we are the people's processor company, we don't need no stinkin' profit. Quit swearing.

: )


RE: Budget
By bbomb on 5/12/09, Rating: -1
RE: Budget
By rcc on 5/12/2009 2:19:58 PM , Rating: 1
I'm not sure exactly what you were replying to, or what that had to do with my comment.

But, just responding to your words I'd have to say if that's true, they should just close the doors and find productive work. If a company can't turn a profit, or at least break even, they are a temporary glitch, not a competitor. And if they are only breaking even, they can't afford new products.

So far, AMD has managed to find people with money to lend them in their quest for a competitive product, without that they'd have been gone long ago. It's a shame really, because competition is obviously good for the CPU (and other) market.


RE: Budget
By eddieroolz on 5/12/2009 3:06:53 PM , Rating: 2
But there's another dimension to the debt AMD has, right?

The massive debt was caused by the acquision of ATi. Had they not done that, they'd probably still be breaking even or maybe even turn out profits.

Remember, when Pentium 4 was acting as fusion reactors for millions, AMD was turning out a handy profit for each and every Athlon 64. :)


RE: Budget
By rcc on 5/12/2009 3:24:03 PM , Rating: 2
None of which really changes or affects my response. It just proves that when AMD has/had an industry leading chip they can make money. They don't capitalize on it as well as they should, for various reasons, but they can make money.


1.06 Billion Euro
By cfaalm on 5/13/2009 7:29:13 AM , Rating: 2
Intel is fined by the EU for 1.06 B Euro, an all time high.




RE: 1.06 Billion Euro
By crystal clear on 5/13/2009 8:00:26 AM , Rating: 2
and Intel will appeal."


Marketshare vs Profitshare
By crystal clear on 5/13/2009 7:54:24 AM , Rating: 1
"Intel never sells products below cost." whilst "AMD does sell its products below cost."

The result being, even though AMD's marketshare increases their profits dont increase on the contrary decrease .

AMD is preoccupied with inventory clearance rather than really competing in the marketplace.

AMD is preoccupied catching up with Intel's technology lead rather than actually competing neck to neck in the technology race.

We have however, consistently invested in innovation, in manufacturing and in developing leadership technology. The result is that we can discount our products to compete in a highly competitive marketplace, passing along to consumers everywhere the efficiencies of being the world's leading volume manufacturer of microprocessors."


http://www.intel.com/pressroom/archive/releases/20...

So the news of increase in AMD's marketshare is just to get itself some good ratings on the stock exchange & good public relations thats all.




By crystal clear on 5/13/2009 8:13:14 AM , Rating: 1
Intel sees order and margin improvement, shares up

Paul Otellini told investors second-quarter sales depend on how they fare in June but "so far, so good" -- in remarks that sent Intel's shares up as much as 4 percent in extended trading.

"We are halfway through Q2," he said. "In terms of our order pattern and our billing pattern, it's a little better than expected."



Intel executives also said on Tuesday gross profit margins should return to "normal" levels, which it defined as between 50 percent and 60 percent, in the next several quarters.

Margins for the Atom chips used in a new generation of low-priced netbook computers, will be above 50 percent in the fourth quarter of 2009, the company said.

http://www.reuters.com/article/ousiv/idUSTRE54B6QV...


Turion processors are HOT! Literally!
By nayy on 5/12/09, Rating: -1
RE: Turion processors are HOT! Literally!
By jonmcc33 on 5/12/09, Rating: -1
RE: Turion processors are HOT! Literally!
By Motoman on 5/12/2009 11:29:51 AM , Rating: 4
There's a stroke of genius.

The hotness of any particular laptop has a lot more to do with their heatsink/fan design and airflow properties than the CPU inside. Just as easy to have a scalding-hot Intel lappy as an AMD one.


RE: Turion processors are HOT! Literally!
By Kefner on 5/12/2009 11:37:25 AM , Rating: 3
Yea really, I have a Turion x2 in my laptop, and I am amazed after using it for awhile, it's always cool to just slightly warm to the touch. I use it sitting right on my lap, and have never came close to feeling any uncomfortable heat from it. When I first got my laptop, I thought of getting one of those lap pads to protect from burns, but never needed it. Glad I didn't waste my money on one.


RE: Turion processors are HOT! Literally!
By nayy on 5/12/09, Rating: 0
By Adul on 5/12/2009 1:15:04 PM , Rating: 2
Try a bios update? Sometimes that makes a difference as we had a few at work go through bios updates and run much cooler.


RE: Turion processors are HOT! Literally!
By GodisanAtheist on 5/12/2009 2:20:04 PM , Rating: 3
I have an Averatec 2570 with a TL-60 (2.0 Ghz)processor, and honestly I'm quite pleased. It performs on par with Intel's T7xxx mobile processors, it runs at a decent temp and if word processing or net surfing I can still get ~2:30 to 3hrs of life on this POS 4 cell battery.

Additionally, and perhaps much more important, is the AMD platform comes with an ATI integrated chip instead of Intel's stinker. My x1270 is pretty comparative to the X3100 in terms of raw power, but the driver support can really takes it to another place.

Perhaps our respective definitions of "toasty" are wildly different. I mean, with my thigh blocking the intake for my processor, its running at ~40c... not horrible by a longshot.


By GodisanAtheist on 5/12/2009 2:31:23 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
but the driver support can really takes it to another place.


Heh I pulled a Toki, don't know how I did that...

Just axe the "can".


RE: Turion processors are HOT! Literally!
By CyberHawk on 5/12/2009 3:05:57 PM , Rating: 2
Do they?
I own a HP 7400 with core 2 duo and just by playing poker on facebook (texas hol'em poker) CPU temperatures go as high as 74 degrease Celsius .... once or twice high temperatures resulted a reset of my laptop.

And I provide a good airflow and take it apart sometimes to clear the dust.

Couldn't of disagree more.


RE: Turion processors are HOT! Literally!
By Diesel Donkey on 5/12/2009 5:42:37 PM , Rating: 2
Something is wrong with your laptop, then. No computer should be reaching 74 deg C during normal operation. Not even my old Sager notebook with a P4 2.8 GHz cooking away. It never gets above 45-50 deg C.


RE: Turion processors are HOT! Literally!
By aj28 on 5/13/2009 3:25:46 AM , Rating: 2
Actually no. Notebook processors are more than capable of reaching those temperatures and even higher quite comfortably. Have you ever seen the HSF assembly on a DV4/6/9000-series HP? I kid you not, the fin array is roughly 10 mm x 50 mm, and that cools both the CPU and the chipset. Don't get me started on the models with dedicated graphics... These things are designed for hot environments.


By mindless1 on 5/13/2009 4:41:32 PM , Rating: 2
Not to be picky or anything, but that 10x50mm heatsink and it's ill-chosen thermal pad interface is why all the nVidia northbridges failed and HP offered free repairs on the mentioned models (after financial encouragement from nVidia), in addition to them erroneously tying fan speed to CPU temp instead of whichever (CPU or IGP) was warmer at the moment.

So it wasn't necessarily the surface area of the fins so much as the heat spreader plate soldered to the heatpipe, the thick thermal pad under it (spongy rubber about 1mm thick), and a logic mistake in fan size versus speed response to keep noise down. Don't get me started about the need to take the entire laptop apart just to clean the fan and intake, exhaust areas of dust which is ludicrous on a full sized laptop today.

Generally speaking, once a CPU starts cycling above 70C on a regular basis the thermal stresses become significant against it's long-term mechanical stability. On the other hand most people find another way to break their laptop instead of it becoming obsolete for even basic tasks like is the case so often with desktops.


By Diesel Donkey on 5/13/2009 5:27:13 PM , Rating: 2
Capable of reaching those temperatures? Yes, if something is wrong. Should they be reaching those temperatures? No. I'll give you upwards of 65 deg C, but 75 is just too much. If the notebook in question is operating near the thermal cutoff limit of the CPU, then something is wrong.

And I have exactly the type of "hot" computer to which you refer. I have a Sager NP5680. If you really want to compare heatsink sizes, mine is 12 mm x 140 mm . My notebook also contains a dedicated ATI 9600Pro graphics card. It's a beast! But it runs at <50 deg C. That's not to say that others don't run hotter, however. But I stand firm on my point that if a computer is regularly reaching its thermal safety trigger under normal usage then something is wrong with it. It could be a dead fan, dust buildup, a poor thermal contact between the heatsink and CPU, or whatever, but something is wrong.


By V3ctorPT on 5/13/2009 3:27:58 AM , Rating: 2
Yep, there's something wrong there I have a T8300 (2x2.4Ghz C2D and it only goes up to 60ºc), and really stressing him out. Even my GF P4 3.2Ghz goes to 65ºc constant, the fan is always "shouting", but it's only 65ºc ^_^


By Belard on 5/12/2009 5:14:16 PM , Rating: 1
Yeah right.

I have a ThinkPad and I even sell them. None of them last close to 9 hours with constant usage. They perform the same as any other PC notebook.

They do sell extra large battery packs but those cost $$$ and don't reach 9 hours.


By rudolphna on 5/12/2009 3:25:59 PM , Rating: 2
Strange, I have an AMD Turion64 X2 TL-58 (1.9Ghz Dual Core) laptop, that I can use for hours with shorts, and its not in the least uncomfortably warm. And the fan is quiet too. Battery life is a little over 2 hours just browsing and listening to music.


By mindless1 on 5/13/2009 4:48:24 PM , Rating: 1
You didn't mention anything about the model number, the size, the design, so merely mentioning two companies names does little in the way of useful info.

Next time read the CPU specs, then you will know how comparably sized, comparably priced (better cooling costs more like anything else), laptops will do with comparable thermal rated CPUs.

A Turion X2 is not a particularly high wattage chip, either your specific specimen of laptop has something wrong with it, your loads are high and your environment blocking the exhaust port some, or HP's design was insufficient. Using similar penny-pinching design strategy it is likely the near-equivalent thing they sold with the other camp's CPU in, would have similar temps under similar load.


"Game reviewers fought each other to write the most glowing coverage possible for the powerhouse Sony, MS systems. Reviewers flipped coins to see who would review the Nintendo Wii. The losers got stuck with the job." -- Andy Marken














botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki