3 ms·
I wonder how they determine the server market share. It seems way too low given that over the last year, I see offers for AMD-based servers and vServers pop up
by TonyTrapp 5y ago
I wonder how they determine the server market share. It seems way too low given that over the last year, I see offers for AMD-based servers and vServers pop up everywhere at least in Germany. Many hosters support AMD as an option or as the only choice.
- DaiPlusPlus 5y agoThose would be new servers - whereas old servers purchased 3+ years ago are still humming away probably for another half-decade to come. Also, VPS/hosting are far from the entirety of the server market: don't forget all the on-prem, enterprise, and SOHO boxes.
- TonyTrapp 5y agoThe longevity is a good point, but if those numbers are derived from users running PassMark on those servers, I would suspect that they don't keep running the software on their server they purchased some years ago: From my understanding, people would be more likely to run this software on a recently-purchased computer to evaluate its performance.
- qalmakka 5y agoYeah, EPYC CPUs kicks ass while Xeons cost an arm and a leg, so I really don't understand how Intel could be selling more server CPUs than AMD right now, unless it is due to some OEM shenanigans (like on laptops)
- magila 5y agoA lot of server customers care about more than just how good the CPU itself is. Having a reliable support ecosystem and platform continuity is an important consideration in the server market. Intel has proven for decades that they can provide these things, while AMD burned a lot of people when the Opteron line was left to rot. It's going to take time for AMD to prove itself a reliable supplier in the server market.
- beebeepka 5y agoLeft to rot? Their product sucked. Dumping more money into it at the time would not have been very smart I think
- smw 5y agoNot enough supply of EPYC chips.