4 ms·
> At the time Intel's dominance was supreme They are the poster child for "we have a monopoly so we don't have to innovate or even maintain competence". Mind y
by pjc50 1y ago
> At the time Intel's dominance was supreme
They are the poster child for "we have a monopoly so we don't have to innovate or even maintain competence". Mind you, how much worse must things be at AMD that they're not winning the x64 war? Eventually the "PC" market is going to get run over by ARM like everything else. Especially now there's a Windows on ARM with proper backwards compatibility.
(although something is very odd with drivers on Windows-ARM, if anyone knows the full story on how to get .inf based 'drivers' working it would be genuinely helpful)
- smallmancontrov 1y agoIt sure seems like AMD is winning the x64 war? https://www.alltechnerd.com/amd-captures-17-more-cpu-market-share-in-2025-as-intel-declines-by-10/ https://www.alltechnerd.com/amd-captures-17-more-cpu-market-...
- neogodless 1y agoMaybe a semantic argument, but I'd say they are "on their way to winning", but once they have a higher market share than Intel, "they are winning". > Despite Intel still holding the lead with 56.3% of systems validated through CPU-Z, AMD is closing in, now claiming 43.7% of the market.
- Aardwolf 1y agoI do hope intel comes back, while I prefer AMD currently (due to no avx512 on intel consumer cpus and me not being interested in having things scheduled on efficiency cores in my desktop pc), if there's no competition anymore who knows what AMD might become...
- Sohcahtoa82 1y agoI'm a gamer, and for Intel to make a comeback for me, they need something that competes with AMD's X3D chips, which absolutely dominate all the gaming benchmarks. The Core Ultra CPUs are an absolute joke for gaming, often being beaten even by the 14th gen CPUs. The Core Ultras had a major performance regression in L3 cache speed which destroyed gaming performance. Games love large cache sizes. The Ryzen 9700X has the same number of cores, but a slower clock than a 9800X3D, yet the 9800X3D comes out on top purely because it has 96 MB of L3 cache compared to 32 MB. If Intel would have put out an i9-14900K with 96 MB of L3 cache, it'd probably come out on top.
- pjmlp 1y agoThis is a very Apple viewcentric point of view. Windows on ARM is still largely ignored, everyone on the consumer level is more than happy with current Intel/AMD offerings. Every single attempt to sell Windows ARM systems has been more or less a flop, including the recent CoPilot+ PCs. Windows developer community also largely ignores Windows on ARM, unless there is an actual business value to support yet another ISA during development, CI/CD pipelines, and QA. Only Apple gets to play the vertical integration game, our way or go away attitude, and they are the survivors of home computer vertical integration only because they got lucky when banks where already knocking on the door.
- pjc50 1y agoI did say "eventually", because I'm at the very start of "yet another ISA during development, CI/CD pipelines, and QA" work.
- pjmlp 1y agoWhich means that there is some business value on selling the software on Windows on ARM devices to budget such efforts.
- aggregator-ios 1y agoCan you present data from sales numbers and developers showing this? Need to see the numbers of ARM vs x86 for sales and how many applications are currently one/both.
- pjmlp 1y agoWalk into any random shopping mall computer shop and observe how many people care about buying Windows ARM, or are asking about them. Those are my numbers. If you prefer something more official, https://www.pcworld.com/article/2816617/microsofts-copilot-gamble-is-a-bustbut-ai-pcs-still-feel-inevitable.html https://www.pcworld.com/article/2816617/microsofts-copilot-g...
- 1y ago
- justinclift 1y ago> they're not winning the x64 war? That's probably the strongest mis-statement I've heard this week. At least, it seems AMD have been the x86-64 leaders for several years now. Why are you thinking AMD aren't winning?
- jvanderbot 1y agoBy precisely what metric are AMD the leading x86-64 vendor? Intel still outsells them.
- justinclift 1y agoEPYC? I don't think I even know anyone (including in businesses) who buy Intel for anything any more, and it's been that way for a few years.
- zamadatix 1y agoThat's why you want to look at data rather than people you know https://www.servethehome.com/amd-epyc-9005-turin-turns-transcendent-performance-solidigm-broadcom/amd-epyc-revenue-share-gain-2017-2024h1/ https://www.servethehome.com/amd-epyc-9005-turin-turns-trans... I think Epyc will get there within a few years, it has great momentum and Intel's response has been pretty weak.
- tempnew 1y agoStock price delta over the past five years is a good metric since the market is efficient and traders themselves use all available information.
- johnisgood 1y agoI think Intel's been losing for a while now. I would rather have RISC-V over ARM, though.
- kldg 1y agoI was pretty pleased to see a news article on the x86/x86-64 emulator for RISC-V, felix86, recently, where they've had success running Steam and playing relatively complicated 3D games using a PCIe graphics card. Dealing with MCUs for projects, RISC-V Espressif chips and boards are no-brainers now; I buy big bags of ESP32 boards from Seeed. I get some free ARM boards at work, which are neat - I always love playing with MCUs - but they're relatively power-hungry and expensive without a lot to show for it. I'm either using a ~$6 ESP32 board or a ~$1 ATTiny in a DIP package for home/fun projects. ESP32s are starting to show up in consumer electronics I find, too, along with the relatively pared-down ESP8266s which I'm not as fond of, though I can still flash them easily over USB-TTL at least, so whatever. In the SBC space, ARM is competing with x86. RISC-V exists but only really for enthusiasts. RISC-V may start making inroads here soon. I picked up some Radxa Rock 2F boards (using ARM-based Rockchips) for ~$12 shipped a few months ago, they run Debian, and these have been fantastic for projects (though now ~impossible to source the cheap 1GB variant of). It's difficult to imagine it being worth getting involved in this nightmarishly competitive space, though obviously some still do. Most seem to try finding some obscure niche to justify a high markup. In many workloads, it's more the GPU that matters. I need an MMU, a PCIe slot, and driver support. Most of us don't really need these outlandishly complex and CPU-centric $100+ ATX motherboards, or even CPU/RAM sockets/slots; just solder it on. -Like, how often do people even upgrade the CPU on a motherboard anymore? I'm more liable to throw the whole thing out because it doesn't have any 10PB/s 240GW USB9 quantum ports, so cut materials, decrease surface area, lower cost, and make it disposable.
- GeekyBear 1y ago> Especially now there's a Windows on ARM with proper backwards compatibility. I wouldn't say that Microsoft's Prism x86 to ARM translation layer has been anywhere near as successful as Rosetta was at running the majority of legacy software on day one. Prism is improving, but the Windows on ARM reviews are still bringing up x86 software that didn't work at all.