ATI grabs 42% US market share beating Nvidia

[nemesismk2]

"Despite nVidia's seeming dominance in the graphics card market, their main rival, ATI walked away with the USA's best sales figures in 2001. As amazing as it sounds, ATI Technologies posted an amazing 42 percent market share in the US graphics card market throughout 2001, making them the number one retailer in the territory! As well as being the top selling manufacturer in America for 11 of 2001's 12 months, ATI produced cards also accounted for six of the top ten best selling graphics boards throughout the year. Not surprisingly, three of the six ATI graphics cards that achieved a top ten ranking were those based on the Radeon chipset. The Radeon chip is ATI's answer to nVidia?s GeForce range, and quite obviously the power of Radeon is proving to be a real hit with consumers across the pond!"

ATI grabs 42% market share, nvidia left sulking!

Maybe Hercules was right to dump Nvidia and go with ATI and the Kyro 2 ofcourse, do you think others will soon follow and give ATI more support? Comments?

 

[giocopiano]

Who cares. Does it really affect the way you play your games.

 

[AA0]

in the future, yes. ATI needs money if they are going to keep doing this.

 

[Sunner]

The question is, is that ATi vs individual vendors like Asus, Leadtek, etc, or ATi vs All nVidia based vendors?

 

[Beatles]

<< The question is, is that ATi vs individual vendors like Asus, Leadtek, etc, or ATi vs All nVidia based vendors? >>


The latter.

 

[nemesismk2]

<< The question is, is that ATi vs individual vendors like Asus, Leadtek, etc, or ATi vs All nVidia based vendors? >>



It's about market share and that means it's ATI v any Nvidia based video card regardless of vendor.

 

[nemesismk2]

<< Who cares. Does it really affect the way you play your games. >>



Yes it does matter, bigger market share=more money=better investment in new technology=faster more feature rich video cards=smoother and more detailed games.

 

[railer]

<< The question is, is that ATi vs individual vendors like Asus, Leadtek, etc, or ATi vs All nVidia based vendors? >>



<<It's about market share and that means it's ATI v any Nvidia based video card regardless of vendor.>>


That may be true, but you can't infer that from the 'article'. Not much of an article if you ask me. <shrug> Not that I really care, but this was for the 2001 sales year, and the 8500's didn't start rolling out until the very end of 2001 with somewhat crappy performance based on the then current drivers. So for nearly all of 2001, ATI was like 2 product cycles behind Nvidia (Orginal Radeon gets smoked by GF2, while GF3's were out for nearly all of 2001) and they still outsell them? Amazing. Goes to show how much you can pump up sales by selling cheap crap to OEM's. What's ATI's profit margin? That's what I'm curious about...

 

[nemesismk2]

<< << The question is, is that ATi vs individual vendors like Asus, Leadtek, etc, or ATi vs All nVidia based vendors? >>



<<It's about market share and that means it's ATI v any Nvidia based video card regardless of vendor.>>


That may be true, but you can't infer that from the 'article'. Not much of an article if you ask me. <shrug> Not that I really care, but this was for the 2001 sales year, and the 8500's didn't start rolling out until the very end of 2001 with somewhat crappy performance based on the then current drivers. So for nearly all of 2001, ATI was like 2 product cycles behind Nvidia (Orginal Radeon gets smoked by GF2, while GF3's were out for nearly all of 2001) and they still outsell them? Amazing. Goes to show how much you can pump up sales by selling cheap crap to OEM's. What's ATI's profit margin? That's what I'm curious about... >>



What you say is true, there is no denying that. However think of it like this, Nvidia might of had the better products but they STILL couldn't improve their market share. The GF3 wasn't exactly a huge success for them, the whole ti range confused the hell out of consumers who didn't know what they were getting.
When people thought they couldn't mess up again they release the GF4 MX which is barely faster than the old GF2, talk about peddling obsolete rubbish.

 

[Leon]

Reality check:

Retail accounts for 7% of total market share.

Now, here is the numbers from MR:

Standalone desktop market share:

Nvidia = 66%
ATI = 25%

Total OEM market share (including integrated, desktop, and mobile)

Nvidia = 36%
ATI = 18%

Just like 3dfx back then, ATI started pumping NPD data about their retail success.... though with only two profitable quarters in last few years, they need PR's like that

 

[Theslowone]

Leon
Not to dispute you but do you have the place where you got your stats from?
Because how does nvidia + ati = over 100% of total sales in a market?
That means no kyro, no matrox.

 

[Leon]

<< Not to dispute you but do you have the place where you got your stats from? >>



There are numerous reports on Bloomberg. All based on Mercury Research.



<< Because how does nvidia + ati = over 100% of total sales in a market? >>



I made a typo.



<< That means no kyro, no matrox.
>>



Outside retail market Kyro does not exist. Couple of very small EU OEM's use it, that's about all. The company had 15 Millions in sales for the last year, I think that says it all

 

[DefRef]

<Yawn>...More ATI fanboy wishful thinking. That "article" didn't have a shred of journalism in it. It was just stroke material for Nvidia haters.

 

[rickn]

3dfx was always issuing press releases how they were #1 in retail yadda yadda, yet they could never turn a profit, and well..we all know how that ended. Deja Vu

 

[FuManStan]

What's strange is that i hear about how large of a percentage that ATI has in the OEM market but when I look at most computers being sold over the last year, i ususally see integrated Intel graphics in the low end, cheap Nvidia cards like the TNT2 M64 in the mid range, and then higher end Nvidia cards on the more expensive computers. I rarely see Radeon boards in the default configurations, and it doesnt seem to me like consumers would go out of their way to choose an ATI card over Nvidia. The only thing i can think of that is in favor of ATI are in notebooks.

 

[spanky]

<< <Yawn>...More ATI fanboy wishful thinking. That "article" didn't have a shred of journalism in it. It was just stroke material for Nvidia haters. >>



this was and a somewhat civil and intellectual thread, til u got here with ur flame bait.

EDIT: i need to contribute, becuz DefRef says i'm not contributing. i don't think ati will end up like 3dfx becuz they are already established in the oem sector. an if ati does not learn from 3dfx's demise, they would deserve to fall. i doubt/hope that will happen.

 

[Theslowone]

The only thing i can think of that is in favor of ATI are in notebooks.

Thats what I was thinking, they are in a lot of notebooks, by far having the lead. They are a huge power in the oem market as well as retail. Their msg wasn't saying they sale more cards then anyone, it is simply stating they have a larger market in the retail area. Nothing more nothing less. People who own stock and are going to buy the products like to hear positive information coming out of the company. So what wrong with them telling what is true?


I like both companies a lot, actually wish there was more options out there, but these two are competing very well against each other and hopefully the competition will be there for a while.

 

[AA0]

ATI definitely has the mobile market, the GF2GO couldn't penetrate too well, since there were driver problems, and its power consumition is still higher then ATI chips (which is by far ATIs strength).

In the low end market, the TNT2s and Rage128/128 pros compete, both are dirt cheap now. I've noticed a few manufacturers go from TNTs to Rages in the last while just due to poor 2D image quality. 19" monitors are horrible for those older cards, and it looks like many companies found that out. I still use Rage cards for business systems.

 

[TheYetiMan]

Sheeesh, building all those cards, it's no wonder it was difficult to find time to develop drivers !

I'm confused you see, I run an ATI card (8500, just passed my 64 ddr vivo on to my dad), but i own stock in Nvidia...

I wish ATI would get to town on their drivers (though i can't complain AT ALL about the current ones), i wish Nvidia would push some more silicon through the shipping docks !

 

[DefRef]

<<

<< <Yawn>...More ATI fanboy wishful thinking. That "article" didn't have a shred of journalism in it. It was just stroke material for Nvidia haters. >>



this was and a somewhat civil and intellectual thread, til u got here with ur flame bait. >>


It's only flamebait to the ATI fanboys would would rather spank their video cards and call it their "precious". The article WAS a lousy springboard for this discussion. It was loaded with an insane amount of bias for ATI and was little different from a fanboy post here.

It would be like trying to have a discussion about whether dophins or porpoises would be better at riding a unicycle, me mentioning that NEITHER can ride a unicycle and you filling a diaper about posting flame bait.

The initial premise was flawed. It's pointless to build an argument over it.

 

[alrocky]

Boy, that UK website 'article' reads more like a press release than the truth. No mention of nVidia's market share or who owned the balance of the (100%-42%=) 58% of the market! My thanks to Leon for his post which relates to the whole video card market.Nemesismk2 appears to be mistaken about who is "left sulking!"
It's also a bit amusing to click on the first ink at the bottom of that article too.

 

[Finality]

<< Reality check:

Retail accounts for 7% of total market share.

Now, here is the numbers from MR:

Standalone desktop market share:

Nvidia = 66%
ATI = 25%

Total OEM market share (including integrated, desktop, and mobile)

Nvidia = 36%
ATI = 18%

Just like 3dfx back then, ATI started pumping NPD data about their retail success.... though with only two profitable quarters in last few years, they need PR's like that >>



Saved me the trouble.... As everyone knows the retail market is superbly pathetic in terms of sales. Just take a look at 3dfx numbers.

Besides that the US market is not the entire graphics market. All one needs to do is look at the revenue streams of the two companies. Look at the fact that Nvidia sells just graphics chips and ATI sells the whole board. If someone where to try and count Nvidias revenue in that sense then there revenue would be AT LEAST 2 times higher as it is right now.

 

[Lithium381]

ATi is actually doing better.....i own one.....but i've had it for a while, doesn't even have a gpu......time to upgrade!

 

[BFG10K]

If the article is true then it's great news because it means that ATi is not sinking like common belief said and it also means that they'll be in a great position to aggressively compete with nVidia which results in a win-win situation for everyone, regardless of what side of the fence you're on.

 

[globalsecurity]

Boy, almost sounds like a bunch of nVidia/ATI shareholders arguing?? It would seem to me that nVidia wins the gamers card crown.....if you're willing to pay the price. ATI on the other hand seems to consistently produce the best all around 2d/3d/multimedia cards. Again, generally speaking ATI seems to offer the best value for your money, much the same way as AMD produces the best value for your money. One always pays a premium for the best so if you're rolling in dough buy nVidia and Intel. If you want the best bang for your buck consider other alternatives.

Cheers Mates