AMD's GPU Q3 2012 marketshare - 14% declines across the board to NVIDIA

[AnandThenMan]

And, so? I disagree.

You disagree with reality, sad to say.

As for AMD, I don't know how many times I can repeat myself. But as long as AMD is competing directly with Intel, they are going to flounder. I realize that transitioning away from x86 will be a very painful process, but it is something that should have been started years ago. Intel can outspend AMD 50:1, the fact that AMD is even in the same ballpark in processors is remarkable. I'd like to see what Intel could do with AMD's budget.

 

[SirPauly]

Sorry, to bust your reality bubble, but still disagree and offered reasons.

 

[thilanliyan]

The 7000 series was over priced. Every thing since its release has demonstrated this.

Overpriced compared to what? It beat the nV competition and was priced accordingly. IMO, the people complaining the loudest about the prices were the ones that were not going to buy them anyway...they were just hoping to get 4870/8800GT levels of performance (relatively speaking I mean, for their time) for probably $300 and under. And while I sympathize with those people, AMD needs to make money. Whether they made much while pricing at those levels...I don't know...but the prices were not "wrong" relative to where the competition was.

 

[SirPauly]

Can't fault a company for trying to maximize revenue based on what the market is, which is always dynamic and shifting anyway.

However, I do think it was a fair observation to point out the more incremental and evolutionary price/performance considering it was a substantial and significant node and arch from both parties.

 

[Siberian]

Overpriced compared to what? It beat the nV competition and was priced accordingly. IMO, the people complaining the loudest about the prices were the ones that were not going to buy them anyway...they were just hoping to get 4870/8800GT levels of performance (relatively speaking I mean, for their time) for probably $300 and under. And while I sympathize with those people, AMD needs to make money. Whether they made much while pricing at those levels...I don't know...but the prices were not "wrong" relative to where the competition was.

I'm seeing conflicting views here. People don't want AMD to go out of buisness because NVIDIA will start selling video cards for upwards of $600.

But it was OK when AMD was selling the 7970 for near $600.

 

[MrK6]

I'm seeing conflicting views here. People don't want AMD to go out of buisness because NVIDIA will start selling video cards for upwards of $600.

But it was OK when AMD was selling the 7970 for near $600.

I think you're getting stuck on the numbers rather than the concept of a relative market. When nvidia was selling $500 GTX 580's, a $550 7970 was a better buy for most people. When nvidia introduced a GTX 680 for $500, it was a better buy for most people over a $550 7970. The point is with competition, the consumers are the winners, when a market becomes less competitive, it's bad for consumers.

 

[AnandThenMan]

I'm seeing conflicting views here. People don't want AMD to go out of buisness because NVIDIA will start selling video cards for upwards of $600.

But it was OK when AMD was selling the 7970 for near $600.

Remember the G80 era when ATI was floundering? Adjusted for inflation, the 8800 Ultra was going for $1000.

 

[thilanliyan]

I'm seeing conflicting views here. People don't want AMD to go out of buisness because NVIDIA will start selling video cards for upwards of $600.

But it was OK when AMD was selling the 7970 for near $600.

In the competitive landscape at launch, the price was in line with the competition. nV priced the 680 lower and forced AMD to lower prices as well. That is a good thing for consumers...but you can't always expect AMD to price their cards at bargain prices when their cards are faster.

When nV releases a card, I expect them to price it in line with the competition (hence why I was not surprised when AMD did it), and in most cases in the past nV have priced their cards higher than the equivalent AMD card. This time they priced the card slightly lower than the competing AMD card and that is a good thing.

 

[Siberian]

I think you're getting stuck on the numbers rather than the concept of a relative market. When nvidia was selling $500 GTX 580's, a $550 7970 was a better buy for most people. When nvidia introduced a GTX 680 for $500, it was a better buy for most people over a $550 7970. The point is with competition, the consumers are the winners, when a market becomes less competitive, it's bad for consumers.

By your logic the 680 should have been $600 as it was a much better card.

You can't defend AMDs high price and complain if someone else does it.

Then again maybe thats why they are bleeding marketshare so badly.

 

[AnandThenMan]

By your logic the 680 should have been $600 as it was a much better card.

You can't defend AMDs high price and complain if someone else does it.

Then again maybe thats why they are bleeding marketshare so badly.

Your post makes no sense, on several levels.

 

[MrK6]

By your logic the 680 should have been $600 as it was a much better card.

You can't defend AMDs high price and complain if someone else does it.

Then again maybe thats why they are bleeding marketshare so badly.

Are you trying to have an actual conversation or are you just here to bash AMD/support nvidia? Please answer this if you reply, it'll save time.

The 7970 was more than 10% faster than a GTX 580, and hence at release was a better deal at $550 than a $500 GTX 580 (especially in a market segment where typically price/performance gains are less than linear). Likewise a GTX 680 at release performed the same or better than a 7970 was cheaper at $500, making it also a better deal (other factors aside). I'm not sure if you're being purposefully obtuse or are really stuck on numbers, but again, the point is competition introduces better bang-for-your-buck products and the consumers win.

Your post makes no sense, on several levels.

Amen.

 

[96Firebird]

Are you trying to have an actual conversation or are you just here to bash AMD/support nvidia? Please answer this if you reply, it'll save time.

Please, get off your high horse and try to have a decent conversation without accusing people of trolling or being a fanboy. It seems if anyone disagrees with you, you jump down their throat. It really shows your lack of communication skills.

...the point is competition introduces better bang-for-your-buck products and the consumers win.

Why worry about consumers when, as you said in many previous posts, they are ignorant and idiots? It seems Nvidia could have priced the GTX 680 at $600 and everyone would have ate it up! Right?!

 

[OILFIELDTRASH]

I was just in the market for a card. Nearly pulled the trigger on a 7870 but ended up with a gtx again. I think what kept me from buying AMD is the lack of 120hz support. That was a deal breaker for me. I can live without physx or 3d vision but a lack of 120hz was too much.

 

[SirPauly]

Remember the G80 era when ATI was floundering? Adjusted for inflation, the 8800 Ultra was going for $1000.

AMD owned the company in that time-line.

 

[OILFIELDTRASH]

I said at the release of 7970 that the price gouging would hurt AMD in the end. They didn't gain market share and instead lost 14% when they began with a several month lead of having the next gen out.
I guess Rory Read saw his prey, as he was a self proclaimed predator, and while on the chase he completely lost sight of the prey and ran square into a tree.

 

[AnandThenMan]

AMD owned the company in that time-line.

So? The GPU tech was still all ATI.

 

[AnandThenMan]

I said at the release of 7970 that the price gouging would hurt AMD in the end. They didn't gain market share and instead lost 14% when they began with a several month lead of having the next gen out.
I guess Rory Read saw his prey, as he was a self proclaimed predator, and while on the chase he completely lost sight of the prey and ran square into a tree.

 

[MrK6]

Please, get off your high horse and try to have a decent conversation without accusing people of trolling or being a fanboy. It seems if anyone disagrees with you, you jump down their throat. It really shows your lack of communication skills.

It's a question, don't be so sensitive. He made the argument of favoritism where there was none.

Why worry about consumers when, as you said in many previous posts, they are ignorant and idiots? It seems Nvidia could have priced the GTX 680 at $600 and everyone would have ate it up! Right?!

So you're just posting whatever drivel you can come up with to try to attack me. Take your own advice and go troll somewhere else.

 

[chimaxi83]

I was just in the market for a card. Nearly pulled the trigger on a 7870 but ended up with a gtx again. I think what kept me from buying AMD is the lack of 120hz support. That was a deal breaker for me. I can live without physx or 3d vision but a lack of 120hz was too much.

Huh? AMD doesn't support 120 hz? That's news to me.

 

[OILFIELDTRASH]

Huh? AMD doesn't support 120 hz? That's news to me.

Well there's a hack or something that "supposedly" works. 100hz is it.

 

[SirPauly]

So? The GPU tech was still all ATI.

The GPU Tech was all AMD!

 

[Siberian]

Since most people buy NVIDIA cards anyways and AMD fans are OK with paying upwards of $600, it really won't matter when AMD goes out of buisness.

Physx, cuda and the rest will become standards and pc gaming will begin to improve again.

 

[Final8ty]

Since most people buy NVIDIA cards anyways and AMD fans are OK with paying upwards of $600, it really won't matter when AMD goes out of buisness.

Physx, cuda and the rest will become standards and pc gaming will begin to improve again.

Most AMD fans are in fact not OK paying $600 and didn't buy until the priced dropped unless they were bitcoin miners.
There are even NV fans not happy with the NV pricess and are now thinking of switching.

 

[Elfear]

Since most people buy NVIDIA cards anyways and AMD fans are OK with paying upwards of $600, it really won't matter when AMD goes out of buisness.

Physx, cuda and the rest will become standards and pc gaming will begin to improve again.

Right, because monopoly's always create innovation and keep prices in check...

 

[SirPauly]

I don't think many will disagree if I offer nVidia is a predator and aggressor and without strong competition their teeth may show as they devour value for the gamer. No doubt, pro-active, innovators but one may have to pay a predator premium, one may imagine.

I get uneasy when I see this share differential. Ideally, desire 50/50 and for a few quarters around two years ago, this idealism came to fruition -- great times for value for consumers.