Early AMD Ryzen 9000 Zen 5 listings suggest lower prices than Zen 4

Endymio said:

The "small, temporary" problem with the Athlons lasted more than 2.5 years, as the chronology of the articles indicates. And there are literally tens of thousands of references from OEMs for the last 25 years complaining that their sales were being constricted by AMD's inability to fill orders on time. Stop attempting to deny reality.

Click to expand...

AthlonXP launched 2001, I doubt after that there were bad Athlon supply problems. For obvious reasons.

FYI, there are always complaints about OEMs how some spesific models are short supply, especially after new product has just launched. But again, on those quotes about only Real shortage was about GPUs. And at that time basically all GPUs were on short supply because of miners.

Again, Intel had Serious problems on virtually whole CPU line for around 1.5 years, AMD has had nothing that serious ever.

For example that 600K Opteron "shortage". AND shipped over million CPUs per week that year. 600K is less than one week if we assume steady pace supply. Of course not everything go to one OEM but still, amount is not big.

And about those OEM complaints, they are pretty much BS as proven. That is very evident, they mock AMD to please Intel .You see, when Intel had undeniable supply problems for long time, OEMs stayed pretty silent about Intel not supplying enough units. Why? Because it was Intel. So OEMs made it clear that they keep silence about Intel supply problems. Do we believe those same OEMs about AMD supply problems? That pretty much smmarizes why AMD supple "problems" are mostly BS.

The past is not now... those issues where when AMD was much smaller company.

Yammering about capacity is silly, this is not a stock market. People are buying these retail at stores and online... not in trays.

Endymio said:

Maybe read threads before replying to them? The claim wasn't from Techspot, but from post #3, which I quoted clearly in my reply.


You're the one who claiming the "real" upgrade was laptops, not desktops. Do you stand by that remark?


I'm flattered you're asking my opinion when world's greatest philosopher's have never been able to agree on the definition of right vs. wrong. I don't know if Intel is "right", but their approach is unquestionably more popular among consumers. Only the (small) DIY market cares about upgrade paths -- most people simply buy a new machine to upgrade.


I've already explained why the exact opposite is true. This move is unlikely to garner AMD market share and will significantly depress their total revenues.


Sigh, no, we haven't. Every AMD launch for decades has seen forums flooded with fanboys claiming that THIS is the launch where AMD finally has Intel by the short hairs. Every. Single. Launch.


They've often been a problem in the desktop market too. AMD has many times before led Intel on price/performance ratios, but missed grabbing that golden ring because of supply-side shortages.

Click to expand...

Thank you for confirming all that I said is right about you.

You think that only platform upgrades are "real upgrades" and that Intel is right for changing it often. And that low prices will not affect Intel at all when they have a very expensive to produce product. You also think that "rumors" are somebody writing something random in a forum, not actual industry rumors and information released by publications.

"This move is unlikely to garner AMD market share and will significantly depress their total revenues" - this is factually wrong. when 8 out of 10 CPUs in top 10 amazon are AMD and when over 90% of the CPUs sold by Mindfactory in Germany (or other EU stores) are AMD, market share has been steadily increasing for AMD for a long time. The only place AMD has been slow-ish in growing is with the OEM systems/laptops.

If you are going to argue with multiple people here, at least give us something to chew on. Don't make it too easy for us.

Puiu said:

Thank you for confirming all that I said is right about you.

You think that only platform upgrades are "real upgrades"

Click to expand...

Stop this nonsense. You were the one who stated (https://www.techspot.com/community/...t-lower-prices-than-zen-4.286671/post-2085714) that the "real upgrade" in Zen 5 was for laptops, not desktops. I'm the one who challenged that remark.

Puiu said:

... and that Intel is right for changing it often.

Click to expand...

Nor did I say this. I stated that an upgrade path matters only to the DIY crowd. This is a simple fact that doesn't involve values judgement like "right" and "wrong".

Puiu said:

You also think that "rumors" are somebody writing something random in a forum, not actual industry rumors and information released by publications.

Click to expand...

Again you've misread. The 'rumors' I gave credence to were backup by numerous headlines from industry sources. The rumors I discounted as unreliable nonsense were from this forum -- and 25 years of forums beforehand -- of random posts claiming AMD was about to take the OEM markets by storm. See the difference?

Puiu said:

"This move is unlikely to garner AMD market share and will significantly depress their total revenues" - this is factually wrong. when 8 out of 10 CPUs in top 10 amazon are AMD

Click to expand...

LOL, do you honestly believe OEMs purchase their CPUs on Amazon? You made my point for me. When AMD already controls the DIY markets, they can't gain significant market share here. And these price cuts won't be nearly enough to gain them market share in the OEM markets. Understand the logic yet?

Endymio said:

Stop this nonsense. You were the one who stated (https://www.techspot.com/community/...t-lower-prices-than-zen-4.286671/post-2085714) that the "real upgrade" in Zen 5 was for laptops, not desktops. I'm the one who challenged that remark.


Nor did I say this. I stated that an upgrade path matters only to the DIY crowd. This is a simple fact that doesn't involve a value judgement like "right" vs. "wrong".


Again you've misread. The 'rumors' I gave credence to were backup by numerous headlines from industry sources. The rumors I discounted as unreliable nonsense were from this forum -- and 25 years of forums beforehand -- of random posts claiming AMD was about to take the OEM markets by storm. See the difference?


LOL, do you honestly believe OEMs purchase their CPUs on Amazon? You don't seem to realize you made my point for me. When AMD already controls the DIY markets, they can't gain significant market share here. And these price cuts won't be nearly enough to gain them market share in the OEM markets. Understand the logic yet?

Click to expand...

"real upgrades" as in a paradigm shift for the laptop products. you tried to make it look like the desktop chips are somehow worthless. it's one thing to argue about how big of an "upgrade" something is, it's another to dismiss them and go and weird tangents. get it together dude.


"I stated that an upgrade path matters only to the DIY crowd." - it matters for the entire PC industry and Intel is 100% in the wrong. this is a fact. I don't get your argument at all.

I upgraded a lot of school PCs (I was an IT assistant for a year at a school that that a big IT department) and a lot of office/workplace PCs. very few actually have the budget to do full upgrades and it also involves a lot of man-hours to move the physical hardware itself and data. everybody is asking me for the fastest and cheapest way to upgrade things (be it CPU, GPU, RAM or storage). which is why when they eventually bought new stuff I told them to buy AM4 (around the time of the 2000-3000 series of CPUs)

"LOL, do you honestly believe OEMs purchase their CPUs on Amazon?" - You missed the point by a mile. what kept OEMs from using AMD was the lower stocks and demand. Demand is clearly up, AMD needs to fix is their stocks for OEMs. Sticking to the cheaper and more mature N4 process node seems to be a huge win for AMD in this area. If they manage to please the OEMs they stand to gain a lot, just like they did in the server market. Nobody is saying that this will happen overnight. It took how many years for AMD to get back in the game and rebuild their partner relationships?

"When AMD already controls the DIY markets, they can't gain significant market share here." Instead of just talking, how about you look at the numbers for the desktop market (source Mercury Research): Q1 2023 19,2% desktop market share-> Q1 2024 23,9% desktop market share.

Since when is 4.7% in one year insignificant? AMD will probably surpass in 2024 their peak of about 25% from back in the Athlon days. Seriously... it takes 1 minute to do a google search.

Puiu said:

"I stated that an upgrade path matters only to the DIY crowd." - it matters for the entire PC industry and Intel is 100% in the wrong. this is a fact.

Click to expand...

Real world data proves you wrong. A few big-name OEMs control 85% of the market, and smaller OEMs most of the rest. The DIY crowd doesn't even top 5% market share. The vast majority of people upgrade by purchasing a new machine. Period.

Puiu said:

...you tried to make it look like the desktop chips are somehow worthless.

Click to expand...

No. I asked if you stood by your remark that implied desktops weren't 'a real upgrade'. Instead of replying, you began claiming your statement came from my mouth. Come again?

Puiu said:

"LOL, do you honestly believe OEMs purchase their CPUs on Amazon?" - you missed the point by a mile. what kept OEMs from using AMD was the lower stocks and demand. Demand is clearly up, AMD needs to fix is their stocks for OEMs.

Click to expand...

So you're agreeing with my point that capacity issues are the primary reason that AMD is perpetually unable to garner significant OEM market share? Thanks.

Puiu said:

Q1 2024 23,9%. AMD will soon surpass their peak of about 25% from back in the Athlon days.

Click to expand...

Even if true (which it very well may be) that implies a gain of only 1.1% market share. This is far from a "significant gain" that will "put Intel one the ropes". Thank you for once again agreeing with me.

HardReset said:

Source is some crowdfunding page. Possibly they just needed someone else to blame.

Overall, AMD had some temporary problems with some models, especially just after launch or some short timed issues. However you didn't find anything nearly as bad as Intel 14nm shortages that lasted from mid 2018 to at least end of 2019. That's 1.5 YEARS of shortage on basically every 14nm CPU.

Click to expand...

AMD has always had lower stock numbers than Intel in their OEM deals. This was one of the reasons why OEMs didn't do many "designs" (demand was also a major factor), especially in the first 6 months after a major product launch.

The only question is, will AMD manage to get it right from day one, or will they still make OEMs wait in line for a handful of CPUs? We already know that for laptops AMD is partnering with Asus for some sort of early exclusivity even with the rumours of high launch stock numbers. I feel very conflicted about this

Puiu said:

AMD has always had lower stock numbers than Intel in their OEM deals. This was one of the reasons why OEMs didn't do many "designs" (demand was also a major factor), especially in the first 6 months after a major product launch.

The only question is, will AMD manage to get it right from day one, or will they still make OEMs wait in line for a handful of CPUs? We already know that for laptops AMD is partnering with Asus for some sort of early exclusivity even with the rumours of high launch stock numbers. I feel very conflicted about this

Click to expand...

OEMs generally favour Intel, no matter how bad Intel was or how much shortage Intel had. However now many OEMs sell ARM based "PC"-laptops, they clearly are not so afraid of Intel anymore. Few years back Intel would cease supplying any CPUs for doing something like that.

AMD knows OEMs still won't consider AMD as much as Intel, so it's better for AMD to stick with one manufacturer. Others wouldn't care anyway.

Endymio said:

Real world data proves you wrong. A few big-name OEMs control 85% of the market, and smaller OEMs most of the rest. The DIY crowd doesn't even top 5% market share. The vast majority of people upgrade by purchasing a new machine. Period.


No. I asked if you stood by your remark that implied desktops weren't 'a real upgrade'. Instead of replying, you began claiming your statement came from my mouth. Come again?


So you're agreeing with my point that capacity issues are the primary reason that AMD is perpetually unable to garner significant OEM market share? Thanks.


Even if true (which it very well may be) that implies a gain of only 1.1% market share. This is far from a "significant gain" that will "put Intel one the ropes". Thank you for once again agreeing with me.

Click to expand...

LOL^
OEM = laptops and notebooks, not just PC sales. All those nucs and all the OEM hardware that uses iNTEL, will be soon switching to AMD's Zen5 APUs...


For PC sales DIY is a large portion of CPU sales.

m3tavision said:

LOL^
OEM = laptops and notebooks, not just PC sales. ... For PC sales DIY is a large portion of CPU sales.

Click to expand...

1. Laptops outsell desktops by about 2.5:1, meaning the DIY market for desktop sales is still only about a 15% share.
2. Our discussion is for the CPU market, not just desktops. I was proving my point that an upgrade path matters little to most buyers: this goes double for those purchasing laptops.

m3tavision said:

All those nucs and all the OEM hardware that uses iNTEL, will be soon switching to AMD's Zen5 APUs...

Click to expand...

Maybe -- and personally, I hope so. My point was that the same thing has been said about essentially every upcoming AMD launch for the last 25 years. And we're still waiting to see it happen.

Endymio said:

1. Laptops outsell desktops by about 2.5:1, meaning the DIY market for desktop sales is still only about a 15% share.
2. Our discussion is for the CPU market, not just desktops. I was proving my point that an upgrade path matters little to most buyers: this goes double for those purchasing laptops.


Maybe -- and personally, I hope so. My point was that the same thing has been said about essentially every upcoming AMD launch for the last 25 years. And we're still waiting to see it happen.

Click to expand...

No THIS discussion is about Ryzen 9000 AM5 chips being released at lower pricing (in a few weeks), using Zen5 uplift. You are the one talking about "capacity issues" bcz you do not wish to talk about the reality of today.

Secondly,
AMD's new Zen5 mobile APUs like the Ryzen Ai 9 HX370 is what OEM laptop manufactures are begging for.


Lastly, AMD's AM5 (2022) is a superior platform than iNTEL's lga1700 and 12th-14th gen CPUs. Because lga1700 is now already eol/dead... and all those 12th gen owners (who could've built AM5 rigs instead)... now have to buy/rebuild a whole new mobo(+300) and CPU(+300) just to upgrade, instead of dropping in a X3D chip and going about their way knowing AMD's socket have longevity and support.