• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Question are video card prices headed down yet?

Page 58 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Leeea said:
Nothing stopping either one of them from building a fab. AMD used to have fabs.
Click to expand...

No, due to rising fab costs and increased complexity of the newer processes, there is less room than ever to get into fabbing (again). The market is consolidating into fewer companies that do that and those that do, really have to put a lot of effort in not falling behind.
 
Leeea said:
I am ok with that.

Nothing stopping either one of them from building a fab. AMD used to have fabs.
Click to expand...

I mean... there is a *lot* keeping them from building their own fabs. Maybe if they wanted to partner and take on some of the capital cost of an existing, planned build out they could. But given they might get delivery of ASML made equipment in 2030 if they ordered it now, it's fairly impossible. That's just one reason, of course.
 
There is approximately 0 chance of any company getting into (or returning to) leading-edge semiconductor fabrication. Which company would benefit from throwing away 50 billion a year for some minor margin increase? Even with Intel's scale, it isn't enough. That's why they are trying to add foundry customers.

So the only place you'll see this is where economics don't matter (i.e. SMIC).
 
gdansk said:
Which company would benefit from throwing away 50 billion a year for some minor margin increase?
Click to expand...
Which is why we see governments around the world throwing billions into fab development. To make it attractive for companies to do fabs locally.


And if it is to expensive for AMD to consider, I am happy if all the money goes to Intel or tsmc-usa. The system is working correctly.
 
Leeea said:
I am ok with that.

Nothing stopping either one of them from building a fab. AMD used to have fabs.
Click to expand...

To mirror what others have said, neither company has the institutional knowledge to seriously enter cutting-edge silicon fabrication at this time. And you know, there's the whole EUV problem too.
 
DrMrLordX said:
To mirror what others have said, neither company has the institutional knowledge to seriously enter cutting-edge silicon fabrication at this time. And you know, there's the whole EUV problem too.
Click to expand...
They could if they wanted to.

It would takes years of effort. But either one could make it happen.


There is a great deal of value in having fabs here in the US. If Intel, TSMC, GF, TI, etc are the only companies that benefit from that, then so be it.


If their is no expectation for AMD or Nvidia to run fabs, then their should be no expectation that AMD or Nvidia receive money earmarked for the running of said fabs.


In short, the chips program is doing what is should do, what it needs to do, and this program is absolutely necessary.
 
Leeea said:
If their is no expectation for AMD or Nvidia to run fabs, then their should be no expectation that AMD or Nvidia receive money earmarked for the running of said fabs.
Click to expand...

Okay, but consider this: this Intel we are talking about who despite their crazy profitability for decades mainly fell behind by being complacent while at the same time throwing away $billions (contra revenue, Larrabee, 5G modems, share buybacks, crazy bonuses etc.).

As log as fabs are considered strategic and as long as this governmental largess isn't wasted by continuing to throw away $billions, then fair enough.

If on the otherhand it merely makes it easier for Intel to continue in its old ways despite no longer leading in either fabs or x86 design, then it all just distorts the market.

The politicians should have done some due process rather just listening to lobbyists and insisted that if Intel gets most of this money, then Intel fabs has to be totally divorced from Intel the x86 business. Otherwise, giving the money to TSMC, Samsung, or even GF would have been better.
 
KompuKare said:
Otherwise, giving the money to TSMC, Samsung, or even GF would have been better.
Click to expand...


9to5mac.com

CHIPS Act subsidies vital to Arizona plant, says Apple chipmaker TSMC

The CHIPS Act, which would provide more than $50 billion in subsidies for US chip production, is vital if TSMC’s...
9to5mac.com 9to5mac.com
CHIPS Act subsidies vital to Arizona plant, says Apple chipmaker TSMC
Click to expand...


GlobalFoundries hails passage in Congress of CHIPS bill
Click to expand...


www.theregister.com

Samsung teases 11 Texas fabs as $50bn CHIPS Act vote nears

A semiconductor empire built under the water-starved Texas sun? What could go wrong?
www.theregister.com www.theregister.com
Samsung has lodged an 11th hour proposal to build 11 semiconductor fabs around Austin, Texas over the next two decades, at an estimated total cost of $200 billion.
Click to expand...


Required personnel content:
It would appear they are subsidizing everyone.
 
Last edited:
For the first time since 1999, Intel reported a quarterly loss. The economy, the tech sector is being hit hard. Apple, Samsung have scaled back on parts orders, sales expectations. So really cant expect Nvidia (or AMD) to think its milking time when their new cards are released. After the initial consumer enthusiasm wears off, I think we may see prices lower than we saw with Ampere.
 
It's quite early to make losses already. I think that this speaks to how little Intel profited from the boom in the first place. It's telling that they announced price increases for their CPU's. I think that they've priced Alder Lake very aggressively at the low & mid end and aren't making much of a profit. Then they are hemorrhaging money on the GPU side.
 
The main problem is that CPU upgrades are not that important anymore. For gaming the GPU is the limiting factor in 99% of the cases, so really no reason to upgrade your CPU very often if you just use your desktop for casual stuff and don't have any specific workloads that demands the newest CPU.
 
amenx said:
For the first time since 1999, Intel reported a quarterly loss. The economy, the tech sector is being hit hard. Apple, Samsung have scaled back on parts orders, sales expectations. So really cant expect Nvidia (or AMD) to think its milking time when their new cards are released. After the initial consumer enthusiasm wears off, I think we may see prices lower than we saw with Ampere.
Click to expand...
This is my position. By years end, we'll see who was correct in their predictions as to pricing. Some still expect higher or equal.

AMD, of the big 3, appears to be best positioned for this crisis. They should come out with a much stronger market position.
 
I agree. I think that AMD has the lowest production cost relative to performance. So either they make better profits or make smaller losses.

The actual issue that AMD has is more about gaining market share than with making a decent profit. Mainly due to lacking features and such, which they seem to be working hard on, so they become more attractive to buy.
 
Aapje said:
The actual issue that AMD has is more about gaining market share than with making a decent profit.
Click to expand...

Not anymore. They are all about the ASP now.

Keep in mind, if there's a recession, a real one, the money printer is going to be turned back on. Which means crypto will moon again.
 
amenx said:
For the first time since 1999, Intel reported a quarterly loss. The economy, the tech sector is being hit hard. Apple, Samsung have scaled back on parts orders, sales expectations. So really cant expect Nvidia (or AMD) to think its milking time when their new cards are released. After the initial consumer enthusiasm wears off, I think we may see prices lower than we saw with Ampere.
Click to expand...
I'd like to see prices around what they were for Kepler, Maxwell, and Pascal.
 
jpiniero said:
Not anymore. They are all about the ASP now.

Keep in mind, if there's a recession, a real one, the money printer is going to be turned back on. Which means crypto will moon again.
Click to expand...
There are much bigger "games" being played out globally at present. Throw out all your old assumptions on what will be the response to the present, not possible, recession.

No doubt, many will want to throw more money at the problem. My worldview tells me that this time it is unlikely to happen. We'll see.
 
jpiniero said:
Keep in mind, if there's a recession, a real one, the money printer is going to be turned back on. Which means crypto will moon again.
Click to expand...

Money printer can't go BRRRRRRRRRR if inflation stays this high. Especially in the EU, as the ECB's official goal is to keep inflation below 2%. They've been legitimizing the monetary expansion and ultra-low interest rates as a way to drive up inflation (even though it was pretty obvious that the money wasn't getting into consumer's hands and thus merely drove up investment bubbles, rather than increasing inflation meaningfully, but rather was producing a ticking time bomb).

Right now they are violating their charter by keeping interest rates too low and 'destroying' too little money, but they can merely legitimize that, not actually lowering interests rates and increasing the money supply. So this is not as bad for crypto as it could be, but hardly time to moon us.

And proof of stake should make mining nearly irrelevant to gamers.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top