Why still so much Intel?

[canadian_moose]

Well, competition is good and intel are being smoked right now on power, performance and thermals.
I was intel in the mid to late 90’s, AMD from about 2001 to 2006 then back to Intel until 2019 when I got the Ryzen 7 3700X

The AMD chips are starting to appear in lots more prebuilts and laptops now. Supply issues aren’t helping of course, but you would be mad to buy Intel right now if you could get a 5000 series 9 or 7.

[Pictus]

There used to be a saying, among IT folks, "no one ever got fired for buying IBM".

Replace "IBM" with "Intel" and you have your answer.

The type of people who appreciate AMD are a very small minority of the market.

From https://www.tomshardware.com/features/amd-vs-intel-cpus
"Intel currently has 242 publicly disclosed vulnerabilities, while AMD has only 16.
That's a 15:1 difference in AMD's favor.(...)"

[TribeOfHǫfuð]

Who cares if it works? Who is really occpupied with extra power that you have no use for? If Intel failed running every second program without hickups, you'd had a case. Now a days people have to be very pedantic to invent the problems their aternative processers are going to solve.

[zerocrossing]

Who cares if it works? Who is really occpupied with extra power that you have no use for? If Intel failed running every second program without hickups, you'd had a case. Now a days people have to be very pedentic to invent the problems their aternative processers are going to solve.

True. My Intel is screaming. Plugins that used to cause buffer overruns now barely show on Bitwig’s CPU meter.

[echosystm]

There used to be a saying, among IT folks, "no one ever got fired for buying IBM".

Replace "IBM" with "Intel" and you have your answer.

The type of people who appreciate AMD are a very small minority of the market.

From https://www.tomshardware.com/features/amd-vs-intel-cpus
"Intel currently has 242 publicly disclosed vulnerabilities, while AMD has only 16.
That's a 15:1 difference in AMD's favor.(...)"

Again, the people who know or care about these things are a very small portion of the market.

FYI, I am one of those people. My next computer will be an M2 Mac. If I was buying a PC, it wouldn't be Intel.

[BONES]

I don't get it - at the moment, Intel is clearly inferior and also significantly more expensive. So why is still the vast majority of computer models (both desktop and laptop) that are currently available Intel-based?

Is it because that's what most people want, simply because they are badly informed? Or do the vendors have some kind of deal with Intel? Is Intel in some way scheming in the background to enforce its market-leading position? Or do the vendors get a hefty discount?

Of course the OEMs have a deal with Intel and Intel has a very long relationship with most of them. This isn't the first time Intel has been behind but AMD couldn't maintain their advantage for more than a couple of years, around the turn of the century (AMD Athlon). Vendors aren't going to trample all over a 30 year relationship just to have this years fastest chips, they'll play the long game, knowing Intel will catch up and probably overtake AMD sooner or later. Meanwhile Intel help them with their marketing, as well as supplying a lot of other components, like Wi-Fi chips and Thunderbolt.

Also, as others have mentioned, compatibility can be an issue. When I ran Athlon processors, it was always in the back of my mind. Intel is just a safer bet.

There are things not worth knowing about. If my Macs run Reason without annoying me with CPU stress, the rest is a black box, which I'd rather not open. I just bought an additional mac just because I could get it cheap. Mac pro i7 3,1 ghz, 16 gb Ram...

How cheap is "cheap"? I recently bought a Surface Pro, ex-corporate lease, with a 6th Gen Core i7, 16GB RAM, 256GB SSD and a TypeCover (keyboard) for just over US$400 (Au$550). To me, that's properly cheap for what looks and performs like a brand new computer. It should serve us as our live machine for many years.

[TribeOfHǫfuð]

How cheap is "cheap"? I recently bought a Surface Pro, ex-corporate lease, with a 6th Gen Core i7, 16GB RAM, 256GB SSD and a TypeCover (keyboard) for just over US$400

Erhm...not "that" cheap. I'll give you that. You win this round.

[Passing Bye]

Again, the people who know or care about these things are a very small portion of the market.

If that was true, market wouldn't be like this, it doesn't revolve around audio people who are totally out of touch with it and buy computers every 5-10 years, we are small share of it, gamer market is what dictates it, that's the people who are constantly selling, buying and upgrading their computers, following trends and keeping market cash flow, who are interested in computer technology and advancement, if we can procrastinate about plugins, synths and DAW's here endlessly, they also do that about components and etc.

Another thing, there's big market in selling components, not computers, every computer nerd and gamer build his own, it's only people who are clueless about that that buy something off the shelf, also corporate, companies and etc, but they also change computers every 5-10 years and just go with HP/Dell/Lenovo offerings, they offer service and all that, but market doesn't revolve around them, maybe income of HP/Dell/Lenovo does, but whole market, no.

[echosystm]

Again, the people who know or care about these things are a very small portion of the market.

If that was true, market wouldn't be like this, it doesn't revolve around audio people who are totally out of touch with it and buy computers every 5-10 years, we are small share of it, gamer market is what dictates it, that's the people who are constantly selling, buying and upgrading their computers, following trends and keeping market cash flow, who are interested in computer technology and advancement, if we can procrastinate about plugins, synths and DAW's here endlessly, they also do that about components and etc.

Another thing, there's big market in selling components, not computers, every computer nerd and gamer build his own, it's only people who are clueless about that that buy something off the shelf, also corporate, companies and etc, but they also change computers every 5-10 years and just go with HP/Dell/Lenovo offerings, they offer service and all that, but market doesn't revolve around them, maybe income of HP/Dell/Lenovo does, but whole market, no.

Gamers and enthusiasts are a tiny segment of the market. This should be obvious. I'm surprised anyone is even trying to debate this.

Servers, government, schools, hospitals, offices and home users vastly outnumber the types of people who care about AMD. The gap is so significant that the difference in upgrade speed is irrelevant. Intel has a stronghold in all those segments, for various reasons. For example, Intel has better virtualization technology, Intel is more trusted, Intel is the safe choice for IT workers, long term contracts bind companies to Intel and many people are ignorant to the existence of AMD entirely.

Intel is still dominant, despite having inferior products. There is a reason for that. You can't simultaneously debunk my assertions and have no explanation for why Intel is remaining dominant; it's a non-argument.

[Passing Bye]

Gamers and enthusiasts are a tiny segment of the market. This should be obvious. I'm surprised anyone is even trying to debate this.

I'm surprised too, market leaders are vendors that sell components, not people who change computer every 5-10 years, just think about it a little, do you know how much money one gamer spends on components in 5 years span, it's insane, he is at his 3rd socket and he upgraded CPU on every socket at least two times, that's just CPU and mobo upgrades... Your average Joe is into phone/tablet market anyways and your business/hospitals/schools folks are not any better than audio guys, they don't spend that much and don't spend that often, what you call home users is actually your typical gamer/enthusiasts, so really don't know what point you are trying to make, guess in your head gamer=AMD fanboy...

You can't simultaneously debunk my assertions and have no explanation for why Intel is remaining dominant; it's a non-argument.

Nobody is debating that, it's straw man.

[Dasheesh]

there is so much misinformation on this thread rn, and there was a reason all this went down.

https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en ... uting.html

[Dasheesh]

google has a working 72 qubit one working, that they have been bragging about, it's powering their AI.

[Dasheesh]

just as a reminder.... google and apple are besties... not micro$oft.

[Passing Bye]

We are talking about mainstream enthusiasts consumer tech here.

[Dasheesh]

also, the M in M1 stands for MOBILE. it was one of their original mobile processors they propagated to the FAILED M1 macbooks..... then upgraded with more cores and propagate to the rest of the line from there. not the first time they have turned from intel huh?

its lower heat for a reason. the lower heat comes from lower resources being called on in osx.