222
AMD continues to chip away at Intel's X86 market share — company now sells over 25% of all x86 chips and powers 33% of all desktop systems (www.tomshardware.com)
submitted 11 months ago by to c/hardware@lemmy.world
49 comments fedilink hide all child comments
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 15 points 11 months ago* (13 children)

its very clear blind brand loyalty has caused extensive brain rot.

These companies don't care about any of us, intel or AMD. We, individually, are only rounding errors in their account books. They arent gonna ask us to prom if we ask them to be exclusive.

Buy whats best at the moment, What has the best bang for the buck, or what have you. Thats how you keep the market good, thats how you keep companies from sliding into complacency. Thats how you make them stay on their toes to constantly stay relevant and innovate, So they can capture your next purchase.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 13 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 11 months ago (4 children)

    100% this. AMD is currently better for laptops/desktops, but my plex is running an Intel because AMD has nothing even close to Quick Sync for video transcoding.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 4 points 11 months ago* (3 children)

    I mean, they literally do. My old HD 7950 had hardware encoding.

    The quality is a bit behind, but AFAIK the biggest problem is that software just doesn't support/expose it as well, and hasn't ironed out bugs. And that the desktop CPUs don't include it.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 11 months ago (2 children)

    Weird logic. I couldn't care less if it has solution to world's hunger if I can't access it.

    I realize some amd processors might have hardware video transcoders, but they are not even close to Intel's quick sync. Fact.

    I didn't really make any claims about why. I don't care. I was just supporting another person's excellent observation that brand loyalty is idiotic and only way to influence the market is to vote with your wallet.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 11 months ago* (1 child)

    if I can't access it.

    but they are not even close to Intel’s quick sync. Fact.

    AMD hardware encoding is supported in tons of apps. In terms of quality, the AV1 encoding specifically seems to be between Nvidia and Intel last gen: https://www.pcworld.com/article/1434166/amd-rdna-3-radeon-rx-7900-xtx-content-creation-review.html

    And got significantly better this gen.

    The problem is on Plex for not supporting AMD hardware encoding , and it's... not really clear why they don't? AFAIK Plex is MPV based, so it should support it out of the box.

    I guess the point I'm trying to make is that, whenever it's time to buy again, its best to re-evaluate. And not assume, say, only Intel has good transcoding hardware.

    I didn't mean for that to come off as abrasive or anything (and fact is AMD VCE doesn't work for Plex specifically for whatever reason, which is a huge problem), but it's also a little microcosm of why Nvidia has like 95% market share. Shoppers's perception of products is not necessarily up to date, and its all too easy to make assumptions based on brands.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 3 points 11 months ago

    100% agree with the last thing you said about checking latest info before buying, but...

    I stand by what I said about nothing AMD makes being even close to QS. Pretty much the only two reasons to need server side transcoding at a level where CPU is still relevant is

    1. Plex and clones.
    2. Security cameras.

    There's nothing worth mentioning that works with AMD.

    My N150 is transcoding 9 4k streams from cameras 24/7 and easily handles another 1 or 2 4k streams when plex needs it. All at <10W. At this load, it almost never goes above 50% cpu consumption.

    I'll definitely check current offerings if I ever need to replace my setup, but right now, AMD basically doesn't exist in this market.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] -2 points 11 months ago (7 children)

    Is it brand loyalty if you just always prefer to know that you're going to spend $100 less and get comparable performance? That's my only reason for supporting AMD the way I do. If things change then so will my opinion.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 11 months ago* (6 children)

    You claim to have used AMD for over 25 years, with your comment of having used 5 CPUs for around 5 years each, straight AMD, which is about 1 CPU per each CPU family/generation

    AMD has had more than one absolute stinker in that time frame. Bulldozer and its refinements were so fucking awful that it almost killed AMD as a company.. it was only a desperate dice roll on Zen that brought AMD back into relevance.

    So yes, arguing with verifiable facts to push the "AMD has always been the best 4 evar" is indeed blind, foolish brand loyalty.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
    •
  • [–] -1 points 11 months ago (5 children)

    I couldn't give a shit less what you think

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 11 months ago (4 children)

    There there, no need to be so angry over having your bullshit called out.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] -1 points 11 months ago (3 children)

    Keep on writing words like they mean anything

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 11 months ago (2 children)

    and yet you keep coming back, reading my post, and replying.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •